论文部分内容阅读
目的 对比分析静脉和动脉不同给药途径新辅助化疗治疗局部晚期宫颈癌(LACC)的临床疗效和不良反应.方法 对宫颈肿瘤直径≥4 cm、国际妇产科联盟(FIGO)分期Ⅰ B～ⅡB期的LACC患者分别采用静脉途径化疗(静脉组,36例)和动脉途径化疗(动脉组,34例),观察并比较其化疗效果、不良反应等.结果 两组患者54例获得近期部分缓解,总有效率为77.1%(54/70),其中静脉组为72.2%(26/36),动脉组为82.4%(28/34),两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).静脉组发生的胃肠道反应、骨髓抑制的总疗程数(43、32个)明显多于动脉组(23、17个)(P＜0.01).结论 不同途径新辅助化疗治疗LACC的近期疗效相当,静脉给药操作简单,但不良反应相对较大,有条件时以选择动脉途径新辅助化疗治疗为好.“,”Objective To compare the efficacy and toxicity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with venous and arterial way in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer( LACC ). Methods A retrospective study was carried out on 70 patients suffering from tumor diameter≥4 cm and FIGO stage Ⅰ B- Ⅱ B disease of LACC. Among 70 patients, 36 were given venous chemotherapy ( venous group ) and 34 were given arterial interventional chemotherapy(arterial group). All patients received platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy.The therapeutic toxic and adverse effects of the two groups were analyzed and compared. Results Clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy occurred in 54 patients with a total effective rate of 77.1% (54/70),that of venous group was 72.2% (26/36) and that of arterial group was 82.4% (28/34),there was no significant difference between two groups (P ＞ 0.05 ). The number of the occurrence of gastrointestinal tract reaction and bone marrow depression in venous group (43,32 pieces) was more than that in arterial group (23,17 pieces)(P ＜ 0.01 ). Conclusion The results suggest that the therapeutic effects of venous and arterial interventional chemotherapy be similar,but the adverse effects of venous chemotherapy is more serious than that of arterial interventional chemotherapy.