小肝癌多学科综合治疗方式优化选择

目前,对于小肝癌可选择的治疗方法较多,其中根治性治疗方法包括肝移植、肝切除术（包括开放手术及腹腔镜手术）、局部消融治疗等。其中手术切除仍是最主要的治疗方法。随着微创外科技术的发展,腹腔镜下肝切除术已较多地运用于小肝癌病人,同时射频消融也能达到小肝癌根治的目的。在临床实践中,应注重肝癌的多学科综合治疗,根据病人肝储备功能、 肿瘤的大小和部位、 毗邻结构等情况选择治疗方式,通过对治疗方式的优化选择,可减小创伤、降低小肝癌术后复发率、提高病人长期存活率。     

碳包铁纳米晶急性毒性实验及其对肝肾功能和血液系统的影响

目的 分析碳包铁纳米晶(CCIN)的急性毒性及其对肝肾功能和血液系统的影响.方法 经小鼠尾静脉分别注入不同剂量的CCIN粒子,观察小鼠14 d内的急性毒性反应;经大鼠尾静脉分别注入高、中、低剂量CCIN粒子及对照组注入生理盐水,分别于给药前1 d,给药后第1、3、7、14天检测大鼠肝肾功能及血常规.结果 小鼠静脉注射CCIN粒子的LD50=203.8mg/kg;当大鼠静脉注入CCIN 80mg/kg以内时,无动物死亡,肝肾功能、血液系统可能会有一过性轻微损害,但2周内一般可自行恢复.结论 CCIN粒子毒性较低,在一定剂量范围内对肝肾功能及血液系统影响不大.     

肝癌射频消融治疗合理选择与临床评价

肝癌射频消融(radiofrequency ablation,RFA)治疗最早始于20世纪90年代,随着射频消融技术的发展及临床疗效的不断提高,RFA已经成为肝癌综合治疗中重要的治疗手段之一。近年来,肝癌RFA的研究方兴未艾,从最开始的治疗晚期肝癌到现在应用于早期小肝癌的治愈性治疗,RFA在肝癌治疗中     

碳包铁纳米晶结合表阿霉素对HepG-2细胞的作用及对小鼠急性毒性实验研究

目的 观察单纯碳包铁纳米晶(CCIN)粒子及结合表阿霉素(EADM)的CCIN粒子对肝癌细胞的体外作用,并比较单纯EADM与结合了EADM的CCIN对小鼠的急性毒性反应.方法 MTT法检测单纯CCIN以及载EADM的CCIN对HepG-2细胞的毒性,并在光镜、电镜下观察肿瘤细胞对CCIN的吞噬作用.经尾静脉注入不同浓度药物,比较单纯EADM与EADM-CCIN混悬液对小鼠的急性毒性反应.结果 光镜、电镜下可见HepG-2细胞吞噬大量CCIN粒子人胞浆,细胞结构完整,未见明显结构破坏.各浓度的CCIN悬液(包括空白对照组)作用于HepG-2细胞系,所得的吸光度值各组间无差异.单纯EADM对HepG-2细胞株的抑制率比相应浓度的CCIN-EADM混合物高,且含CCIN量比例较低的药物组对HepG-2细胞株的抑制率要高于含CCIN量比例相对较高的组.小鼠急性毒性实验中.单纯EADM经静脉给药的LD50值为16.9 mg/kg,低于相应的EADM-CCIN混悬液的LD50值(20.7 mg/kg).结论 HepG-2细胞可吞噬CCIN粒子;在一定浓度下单纯CCIN对HepG-2细胞无毒性;载药CCIN对肿瘤细胞的抑制在短时间内较单纯相同浓度EADM的抑制作用弱,且随CCIN比例升高抑制作用相应下降;小鼠急性毒性实验中,EADM-CCIN混悬液的急性毒性相对于同剂量的单纯EADM有所降低.     

肝癌分子靶向药物治疗的研究进展

Molecular-targeted therapy is a new method and tendency in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To date, sorafinib, a multi-targeted gent, is the only one proved to be effective in improving the survival of patients with advanced HCC. Sorafinib is also the first line systemic agent for advanced HCC. Other multi-targeted agents, such as sunitinib, are also proved to be effective. Erlotinib, gefitinib and eetuximab, which target epidermal growth factor receptor, show effectiveness but still need further investigation. Bevacizumab, which targets vascular endothelial growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, shows excellent results and deserves more clinical trials. The effects of bortezomib, sirolimus and imatinib, which target other pathways, are still under investigation. The future studies of molecular-targeted therapy for HCC should be focused on the combination of different targeted medicine, and combination of molecular-targeted therapy and chemotherapy, as well as individualized therapy.     

肝癌局部消融治疗规范的专家共识

局部消融治疗是借助影像技术的引导对肿瘤靶向定位,用物理或化学的方法杀死肿瘤组织;影像引导技术包括超声、CT和MRI;治疗途径有经皮、经腹腔镜手术和开腹手术三种。局部消融治疗的特点一是直接作用于肿瘤,     

肝癌射频消融治疗的现状与展望

以射频消融（radiofrequency ablation．RFA）为代表的肝癌局部消融治疗在过去20年发展迅速．已经成为继手术切除、介入治疗后的第三大肝癌治疗手段,在肝癌治疗领域中起着越来越重要的作用。肝癌的局部消融治疗包括射频、微波、冷冻、瘤内无水酒精注射术、高聚集超声等多种不同方法。其中射频消融是局部消融治疗中最常用的方法。     

经皮射频消融与再手术治疗单个直径≤3 cm的复发性肝癌的疗效比较

目的 比较经皮射频消融(PRFA)与再手术切除治疗单个直径≤3 cm的复发性肝癌的疗效.方法 回顾性分析1999年1月至2009年12月中山大学肿瘤防治中心收治的151例复发性肝癌(单个肿瘤直径≤3 cm)患者的临床资料,其中79例患者行PRFA(PRFA组),72例行肿瘤再手术切除(再手术切除组).比较两组患者的生存率、并发症发生率及肿瘤复发情况.计量资料比较采用t检验,计数资料比较采用x2检验,生存率计算采用寿命表法,生存曲线采用Kaplan-Meier法绘制,组间比较采用Log-rank检验.结果 PRFA组和再手术切除组并发症发生率分别为13%(10/79)和36%(26/72),两组比较,差异有统计学意义(x2=11.411,P＜0.05).PRFA组和再手术切除组1～5年累积生存率分别为89.7%、75.2%、67.1%、61.5%、56.6%和86.0%、67.6%、53.6%、44.1%、40.2%,两组总体生存曲线比较,差异无统计学意义(x2=1.610,P＞0.05).PRFA组4、5年累积生存率显著高于再手术切除组(x2=4.682,4.196,P＜0.05).PRFA组肿瘤局部复发率为5%(4/79),再手术切除组切缘复发率为3%(2/72),两组比较,差异无统计学意义(x2=0.565,P＞0.05).结论 PRFA治疗单个直径≤3 cm的复发性肝癌的长期疗效优于再手术切除,且具有微创的优势.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the efficacy of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) and repeat hepatectomy for solitary recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the diameter≤3 cm. Methods The clinical data of 151 patients with recurrent HCC (diameter≤3 cm) who were admitted to the Cancer Center of Sun Yat-Sen University from January 1999 to December 2009 were retrospectively analyzed. Of all the patients, 79received PRFA (PRFA group) and 72 received repeat hepatectomy (repeat hepatectomy group). The survival rate, morbidity and recurrence of the tumor between the two groups were compared. All data were analyzed using t test, chi-square test or Log-rank test, and the survival of the patients were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results The mobidities of the PRFA group and repeat hepatectomy group were 13% (10/79) and 36%(26/72), respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (x2=11.411, P＜0.05). The cumulative 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-year survival rates were 89.7%, 75.2%, 67.1%, 61.5%, 56.6% in the PRFA group, and 86.0%, 67.6%, 53.6%, 44.1%, 40.2% in the repeat hepatectomy group, with no significant difference between the two groups (x2=1.610, P＞0.05). The cumulative 4-, 5-year survival rates of the PRFA group were significant higher than those in the repeat hepatectomy group (x2=4.682, 4. 196, P ＜ 0.05). The local tumor recurrence rate of the PRFA group was 5% (4/79), and the incisal margin recurrence rate was 3% (2/72) in the repeat hepatectomy group, with no significant difference between the two groups (x2=0.565, P＞0.05). Conclusion As a less invasive treatment method, PRFA is superior to repeat hepatectomy for solitary recurrent HCC with the diameter≤3 cm.