检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]广东省农垦中心医院肿瘤科,广东湛江524002
出 处:《河南肿瘤学杂志》2004年第1期33-34,共2页Henan Journal of Oncology
摘 要:目的 观察比较枢星联合方案 (枢星联合地塞米松及胃复安 )和枢丹联合方案 (枢丹联合地塞米松及胃复安 )预防顺铂方案联合化疗引起恶心呕吐的临床疗效。方法 将 93例接受以顺铂为主联合化疗患者随机分成 2组 ,枢星组 5 3例接受 70周期化疗 ,枢丹组 40例接受 5 7周期化疗 ,观察 1~ 5天 ,并对恶心、呕吐控制率进行比较。结果 枢星组对急性恶心呕吐控制率分别为 90 %及94.3 % ,均较枢丹组 ( 77.2 %及 80 .7% )明显提高 (P <0 .0 5 ) ,对延缓性呕吐控制率亦优于枢丹组 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论 枢星联合方案可较好地预防顺铂所致急性恶心、呕吐 ,对延缓性呕吐也有一定疗效。Objective The effect of Shuxing with combined regimen (combined use of Shuxing, dexamethasone and metoclopromide) and Shudan with combined regimen (combined use of Shudan,dexamethasone and metoclopromide) were combined in the prevention of DDP induced emesis.Methods 93 patients were randomized into two groups: Group 1, 53 patients in combined Shuxing regimen received 70 cycles of chemotherapy.Group 2,40 patients in combined Shudan regimen received 57 cycles of chemotherapy.The two groups were compared in the rate of acute nausea and vomiting from the first day to the fifth day by chemotherapy.Result The control rate of acute nausea and vomiting in group 1 were 90% and 94.3%, compared with 77.2% and 80.7% in group 2 (P<0.05).Conclusions Shuxing with combined regimen is more effective in the control of DDP induced than Shudan with combined regimen.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.184