胃癌同时性肝转移手术患者的预后分析

目的分析经手术治疗的胃癌同时性肝转移患者的预后因素。方法回顾性分析1998年1月至2012年12月间在大连医科大学附属第一医院胃肠外科手术治疗的胃癌同时性肝转移53例患者的临床病理学资料,对单发和多发肝转移患者的生存率进行比较并进行预后分析。结果本组53例患者5年总体生存率为11．3％。单发肝脏转移患者34例,5年生存率14．7％,明显高于19例多发肝转移患者的0（P=-0．000）。单因素分析结果显示,浆膜侵犯（P=0．000）、淋巴结转移（P=0．000）、手术根治度（P=0．044）、发生肝转移数目（P=0．000）和肝转移肿瘤直径（P=0．031）是影响胃癌肝转移患者预后的因素。其中浆膜侵犯（RR：3。355,P=0．012）和肝转移数目（RR：7．664,P=0．000）是影响胃癌肝转移患者预后的独立因素。结论手术治疗可以提高无浆膜侵犯的胃癌单发肝转移患者的预后。     

经皮射频消融治疗邻近膈顶较大肝癌

目的探讨经皮射频消融(RFA)治疗邻近膈顶的较大肝癌的价值。方法回顾性分析接受超声引导下经皮RFA治疗的176例邻近膈顶较大病灶原发性肝癌患者(近膈组)及157例非邻近膈顶的较大病灶原发性肝癌患者(对照组)的资料。分析比较2组间患者年龄、性别、消融情况、早期灭活率、复发率、肿瘤新生率、并发症发生率及生存率的差异。结果近膈组RFA治疗中膈下注射生理盐水的比例高于对照组(P=0.016),局部复发率高于对照组(P=0.028)。2组患者年龄、性别、病灶最大径、RFA治疗所用消融仪及电极针、肿瘤早期灭活率、肿瘤新生率、并发症发生率差异均无统计学意义(P均0.05),RFA治疗后1、2、3、4、5年的生存率差异无统计学意义(P=0.203)。结论邻近膈顶的较大肝癌更易复发,超声引导下经皮RFA治疗应采取膈下注射生理盐水等个体化治疗方案及策略。     

超声引导下经皮射频消融治疗恶性肿瘤肝转移

目的探讨超声引导下经皮射频消融(RFA)治疗恶性肿瘤肝转移的应用价值。方法回顾性分析2009年12月—2015年5月于我院接受超声引导下经皮RFA治疗的109例恶性肿瘤肝转移患者的临床及影像学资料。结果 109例肝转移癌患者中,单发31例(31/109,28.44%),多发78例(78/109,71.56%);肝转移病灶来源于结直肠、肺、乳腺、胃、胰腺、卵巢及前列腺的恶性肿瘤。共198个肝转移癌病灶中,直径3cm者151个(151/198,76.26%),直径≥3cm者47个(47/198,23.74%)。治疗后1个月,187个(187/198,94.44%)病灶完全灭活,11个(11/198,5.56%)病灶存在残余活性。与治疗前比较,治疗后1个月患者肿瘤标志物指标明显改善(P均0.05)。术中及术后并发症发生率6.42%(7/109)。结论对于非手术适应证恶性肿瘤肝转移患者,超声引导下经皮RFA治疗相对安全、有效,短期内可局部控制肝内转移癌的活性。     

腹腔镜下射频消融治疗肝细胞肝癌

目的 评价分析腹腔镜下射频消融(radiofrequency ablation,RFA)治疗原发性肝癌的安全及疗效性.方法 回顾性研究分析2008年5月至2010年7月中日友好医院应用腹腔镜下RFA治疗原发性肝癌78例,全部病例均在腹腔镜超声引导下至少一个病灶穿刺活检确诊为肝细胞肝癌.其中男41例,女37例,年龄31～87岁(中位年龄57岁).统计分析肿瘤坏死情况、肿瘤局部复发对总生存率的影响.结果 78例患者中位随访16个月.肿瘤直径、是否邻近大血管、周围是否有卫星灶及是否联合经导管肝动脉化疗栓塞(transcatheter arterial chemoembolization,TACE)是影响肿瘤复发的主要因素.直径＜3 cm的肿瘤完全消融率90.5％(38/42),明显比＞3 ～5 cm的肿瘤消融率71.4％ (20/28)高,二者比较差异有统计学意义(x2 =4.291,P=0.038).肿瘤未邻近大血管组的肿瘤消融率91.9％ (61/67),高于肿瘤邻近大血管组的消融率63.6％ (7/11),二者相比差异有统计学意义(x2 =6.351,P=0.012).RFA组和联合TACE组的肿瘤消融率分别为75.0％和88.9％,两者相比,差异无统计学意义(x2=1.567,P=0.211).RFA治疗后平均总生存期(48.7±2.4)个月,术后1、2、3、4、5年的总生存率分别为86.1％、76.9％、60.3％、51.8％、33.1％.结论 RFA是肝脏恶性肿瘤安全、有效的治疗手段,而腹腔镜下RFA,能够更好的判断肿瘤大小、数目以及肿瘤与周围血管的关系,使穿刺更加准确,从而获得更好的远期疗效.     

不同方案治疗胃癌同时性肝转移的疗效比较及预后危险因素分析

目的 :探讨手术、化疗、介入及综合治疗对胃癌同时性肝转移患者的临床效果,并分析预后危险因素。方法:回顾性分析106例胃癌同时性肝转移患者的临床资料,比较接受不同方案治疗的生存率,并行单因素和多因素分析预后危险因素。结果:手术组中位生存时间为35(3~65)个月,1、3、5年累计生存率分别为68.6%、45.2%和12.3%;化疗组中位生存时间为16(3~71)个月,1、3、5年累计生存率分别为60.4%、48.4%和9.8%;介入组中位生存时间为34(3~66)个月,1、3、5年累计生存率分别为62.3%、39.7%和11.5%;综合治疗组中位生存时间为39(3~84)个月,1、3、5年累计生存率分别为85.6%、55.9%和19.2%。4组生存率比较差异有统计学意义(χ~2=17.488,P0.01)。单因素分析结果显示肝外转移、肝转移程度、肝转移灶直径、淋巴结转移、胃切除术、TACE、化疗与胃癌同时性肝转移患者生存期有关(P0.05)。多因素分析结果显示,胃癌同时性肝转移患者生存期的独立预后因素包括肝外转移、肝转移程度、淋巴结转移、胃切除术、TACE及化疗(P0.05)。结论:综合治疗是胃癌同时性肝转移最有效的治疗手段,可延长患者生存期,改善预后。     

胃癌异时性肝转移的治疗及预后因素分析

目的探讨胃癌异时性肝转移的治疗方式及影响预后的相关因素。方法回顾性分析1996年1月至2008年12月天津医科大学肿瘤医院收治的102例胃癌异时性肝转移患者的临床病理资料。其中行单纯化疗64例,化疗联合TACE19例,化疗联合肝转移癌切除19例。患者在术后3年内,每3个月来院随访复查1次,3年后每6个月1次,5年后每年1次。复查内容包括体格检查、实验室检查和影像学检查等。随访时间截至2013年10月。采用Kaplan—Meier法绘制生存曲线,Log—rank法进行显著性检验,COX模型进行预后因素分析。结果102例中行单纯化疗的64例患者,部分缓解15例、稳定22例、进展27例;化疗联合TACE的19例患者,部分缓解6例、稳定9例、进展4例;化疗联合肝转移癌切除的19例患者,术后发生切口感染1例,围手术期无死亡。胃癌复发死亡者16例,其中局部复发10例、多灶复发6例。102例患者中有8例失访,随访时间9～149个月。总体中位生存时间为8个月（2～70个月）,1、3、5年生存率分别为40．2％、17．7％、6．8％。其中64例单纯化疗者中位生存时间为5个月（2—37个月）,1、3、5年生存率分别为15．6％、3．5％、0;19例行化疗联合TACE者中位生存时间为6个月（3～36个月）,1、3、5年生存率分别为26．1％、6．5％、0;19例行化疗联合肝转移癌切除者中位生存时间为15个月（5～70个月）,1、3、5年生存率分别为63．2％、31．6％、16．8％。联合肝转移癌切除者与单纯化疗和联合TACE者累积生存率比较,差异有统计学意义（X2=23．900,P〈0．05）。单因素分析结果显示：原发癌直径、分化程度、是否存在肝外转移、肝转移癌类型、肝转移癌数目和治疗方式与胃癌异时性肝转移的预后相关（,=6．307,7．908,4．375,45．188,18．234,23．900,P〈0．05）。多因素分析结果显示：肝转移癌类型和肝转移癌数目是影响胃癌异时性肝转移预后的独立因素（OR=5．217,3．292,95％CI：1．428～2．882,1．054～2．514,P〈0．05）。结论手术切除肝转移癌仍然是提高患者生存率的关键。在选择治疗方式时应考虑肝转移癌数目和转移癌类型这两个影响患者预后的独立因素。     

胃癌异时性肝转移影响因素及不同治疗方式的效果和预后分析

目的:探讨胃癌异时性肝转移相关因素以及患者采用不同治疗方式的效果和预后.方法:选取胃癌根治术后肝转移患者378例为研究对象,按照患者病情和接受的治疗方式分组,行腔镜手术联合化疗患者95例,接受完全化疗患者97例,TACE联合化疗患者1 86例.分析胃癌患者肝转移相关因素及不同方式治疗的预后.结果:原发肿瘤位置(P=0....     

FOLFOX-6与肝动脉灌注化疗对结直肠癌肝转移治疗效果的比较

目的 比较FOLFOX-6方案全身化疗与传统以氟尿嘧啶为主的肝动脉灌注化疗对结直肠癌术后肝转移病人的疗效并分析影响结直肠癌术后肝转移病人的预后因素.方法 46名结直肠癌术后肝转移病人随机分配到全身化疗组(实验组)和介入治疗组(对照组),对比观察近远期疗效、毒副作用和生活质量.将影响预后的临床特征和治疗方式进行单因素和多因素分析.结果 实验组、对照组总生存率差异有统计学意义(P=0.048),中位生存时间分别为15.0个月和11.2个月(P＜0.05);治疗总有效率两组差异有统计学意义(50%和10%;P=0.011);两组治疗期间的PS评分差异无统计学意义(P=0.126).毒副作用除骨髓抑制、腹痛外,其它比较差异均无统计学意义.单因素分析显示,原发病灶是否浸润浆膜、肝转移灶分布、肝转移病灶最大直径、肝转移灶数目、原发癌有无淋巴结转移以及治疗方式与预后相关.多因素分析后发现,肝转移灶最大直径、肝转移病灶数目、原发癌灶是否浸透浆膜层和治疗模式为影响预后的独立因素.结论 以草酸铂为主的FOLFOX-6方案比传统的以氟尿嘧啶为主的肝动脉灌注化疗有更好的治疗缓解率和远期疗效;肝转移灶最大直径＞5 cm、肝转移灶多发和原发病灶浸透浆膜层提示病人预后不良,采取以草酸铂为主的全身化疗,预后更好.传统药物介人治疗需要改进,局部介入与全身治疗结合的方式值得进一步探究.     

伴肝转移的Ⅳ期胃癌手术方式的合理选择

目的探讨不同手术方式对伴肝转移的Ⅳ期胃癌患者的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析1993-2004年间102例伴肝转移的Ⅳ期胃癌病例的手术方式,评价不同术式对预后的影响。结果肝转移H1的胃癌病例行姑息切除后半年、1年和2年的生存率分别为69%、44%和6%,与改道手术、开腹探查术者的生存率比较,差异有统计学意义(P=0.009)。肝转移H2的胃癌病例姑息切除术后半年、1年和2年的生存率分别为56%、13%和6%,与改道手术、开腹探查术者的生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.068)。肝转移H3的胃癌病例行姑息切除半年、1年和2年的生存率分别为25%、13%和0,与改道手术、开腹探查术者的生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.157)。有或无腹膜转移的病例,其术后生存率比较,差异亦无统计学意义(P=0.132)。结论肝转移H1的胃癌患者,无论伴与不伴腹膜转移,均应尽量行姑息性切除手术。肝转移H2、H3的Ⅳ期胃癌患者行切除性手术无益于预后。     

结直肠癌肝转移预后影响因素的分析

目的 探讨结直肠癌肝转移患者预后的相关影响因素.方法 回顾性分析5年间收治的71例结直肠癌肝转移患者的临床病理资料.选择患者性别、年龄、肝转移部位、肝转移时间、转移灶数目、转移灶大小、原发肿瘤分化程度、有无淋巴转移、有无肝外转移以及肝转移病灶治疗方法等10个因素,用SPSS 17.0软件进行结直肠癌肝转移单因素分析和多因素Cox回归分析,并对有意义的相关因素进行交互作用分析.结果 71例结直肠癌肝转移患者生存时间为(16.5±5.3)个月,3年生存率为12.7％.单因素分析显示肝转移部位、转移灶数目、转移灶大小、肿瘤分化程度、有无淋巴转移、有无肝外转移以及肝转移病灶治疗方法等7个因素与预后有关,它们的组间差异均具有统计学意义(x2 =11.279,9.600,8.076,17.376,19.817,24.310,32.267;P＜0.05).Cox回归模型表明原发肿瘤分化程度(RR=1.671,95％CI 1.236 ～2.345,P=0.026),淋巴转移(RR=1.658,95％ CI1.214 ～2.286,P=0.010),有无肝外转移(RR =2.586,95％ CI 1.758 ～6.326,P=0.000)以及肝转移病灶治疗方法(RR=6.846,95％CI3.624～13.032,P=0.000)与结直肠癌肝转移预后有密切关系.结论 肿瘤分化程度、有无淋巴转移、有无肝外转移以及肝转移病灶治疗方法是结直肠癌肝转移预后的独立危险因素.     

肝癌射频消融后肝脓肿的发生率及危险因素分析

目的探讨肝癌射频消融(RFA)后肝脓肿形成的发生率及危险因素。方法回顾性分析2000年1月—2016年6月接受RFA治疗的1 643例肝癌患者的资料,包括原发性肝细胞癌(HCC)942例、胆管细胞癌(CCC)31例、转移性肝癌(MLC)670例,采用Logistic回归对影响因素进行分析。结果肝癌RFA治疗后肝脓肿发生率为0.79%(13/1 643)。单因素分析显示,糖尿病史、肝功能Child-Pugh分级、手术史及肿瘤位置与肝癌RFA治疗后肝脓肿形成相关(P均0.05);多因素分析显示,糖尿病史、手术史及肿瘤位置为肝癌RFA治疗后肝脓肿形成的独立危险因素。结论糖尿病史、手术史、肿瘤位置是影响肝癌RFA治疗后肝脓肿形成的重要因素。     

43例骨肉瘤患者预后的多因素分析

目的：探讨影响骨肉瘤患者预后的相关因素。方法：回顾性分析2005年3月至2007年3月手术治疗并经病理证实的43例骨肉瘤患者的临床资料,包括性别、年龄、部位、病程、化疗前血清碱性磷酸酶水平、术前化疗、En-neking分期、手术方式及远处转移情况等9项相关因素,采用Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率,应用Log-rank检验行单因素分析,COX检验行多因素分析,研究这些因素与骨肉瘤患者3年生存率之间的关系。采用精确概率Fisher检验研究化疗疗效对骨肉瘤患者预后的影响。结果：43例均获随访,28例存活,15例死亡,生存时间6～65个月,平均39.7个月,中位生存时间42个月,3年总生存率65.1%。单因素分析显示,骨肉瘤预后与部位（P=0.010）、Enneking分期（P=0.002）、手术方式（P=0.000）、远处转移（P=0.002）有相关性;COX多因素分析显示Enneking分期（P=0.028）、手术方式（P=0.001）及远处转移（P=0.007）是影响骨肉瘤患者预后的独立因素。Fisher精确检验显示,尽管术前是否行新辅助化疗对预后影响不明显,但是新辅助化疗疗效的好坏是患者预后的重要影响因素（P=0.007）。结论：骨肉瘤预后与En-neking分期、手术方式及远处转移密切相关,早期发现及充分切除肿瘤是提高骨肉瘤预后可干预措施。     

超声引导下经皮射频消融治疗肝癌

目的观察超声引导下射频消融术(RFA)治疗肝癌(LC)的效果。方法回顾性分析165例LC,其中52例接受保守治疗(保守治疗组),55例(60个肿瘤)接受手术治疗(手术治疗组),58例(64个肿瘤)接受超声引导下射频消融治疗(RFA组),于治疗前后接受CEUS、CT或PET-CT、肝功能、甲胎蛋白(AFP)、癌胚抗原(CEA)等检查,并定期接受临床随访。结果 RFA组患者住院时间和费用明显低于保守治疗组和手术治疗组(P均<0.05);治疗后3个月有效率在手术治疗组与RFA组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但明显高于保守治疗组(P<0.05);3组患者的肝功能指标、AFP、CEA均较治疗前明显下降(P均<0.05),手术治疗组与RFA组优于保守治疗组(P均<0.05);2年生存率在手术治疗组与RFA组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但均明显高于保守治疗组(P均<0.05)。结论超声引导下射频消融治疗原发及转移性LC有效、安全、费用低,特别适用于不能耐受或者不愿手术且直径<5cm的肿瘤。     

Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients with Hepatic Recurrence After Curative Resection of Gastric Cancer

Background  This study was done to evaluate the prognostic factors that may affect the survival of patients with recurrent hepatic metastasis after curative resection of gastric cancer. Methods  We reviewed the medical records of 73 patients with recurrent hepatic metastasis after surgical treatment of gastric cancer from January 1995 to December 2005. Prognostic factors were classified into three groups: primary tumor factors, recurrent hepatic factors, and treatment factors. The prognostic values of these factors were assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses by the log-rank test in the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox’s proportional hazard model. Results  The overall median survival rate of the 73 study patients was 20.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.4–24.6 months]. The median survival rate after diagnosis of recurrent hepatic metastasis was 5 months (95% CI 3.5–6.5 months). Univariate analysis showed that the favorable prognostic factors were stage I and II among the primary tumor factors, no extrahepatic metastasis and unilobar distribution among the recurrent hepatic factors, and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) ± chemotherapy among the treatment factors when operative treatment had been excluded. The independent favorable prognostic factors revealed by the multivariate analysis were no extrahepatic metastasis and RFA ± chemotherapy. The median survival rate of patients who had two favorable prognostic factors was 27 months (95% CI 0–66.38 months). Conclusions  Improvement in the survival rate can be expected with RFA ± chemotherapy for patients with recurrent gastric cancer in the liver without extrahepatic metastasis.     

Resection Versus Laparoscopic Radiofrequency Thermal Ablation Of Solitary Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Purpose  There is scant data in the literature regarding radiofrequency thermal ablation (RFA) versus resection of colorectal liver metastases. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical profile and survival of patients with solitary colorectal liver metastasis undergoing resection versus laparoscopic RFA. Methods  Between 1996 and 2007, 158 patients underwent RFA (n = 68) and open liver resection (n = 90) of solitary liver metastasis from colorectal cancer. Patients were evaluated in a multidisciplinary fashion and allocated to a treatment type. Data were collected prospectively for the RFA patients and retrospectively for the resection patients. Results  Although the groups were matched for age, gender, chemotherapy exposure and tumor size, RFA patients tended to have a higher ASA score and presence of extra-hepatic disease (EHD) at the time of treatment. The main indication for referral to RFA included technical reasons (n = 25), patient comorbidities (n = 24), extra-hepatic disease (n = 10) and patient decision (n = 9). There were no peri-operative mortalities in either group. The complication rate was 2.9% (n = 2) for RFA and 31.1% (n = 28) for resection. The overall Kaplan–Meier median actuarial survival from the date of surgery was 24 months for RFA patients with EHD, 34 months for RFA patients without EHD and 57 months for resection patients (p < 0.0001). The 5-year actual survival was 30% for RFA patients and 40% for resection patients (p = 0.35). Conclusions  This study shows that, although patients in both groups had a solitary liver metastasis, other factors including medical comorbidities, technically challenging tumor locations and extra-hepatic disease were different, prompting selection of therapy. With a simultaneous ablation program, higher risk patients have been channeled to RFA, leaving a highly selected group of patients for resection with a very favorable survival. RFA still achieved long-term survival in patients who were otherwise not candidates for resection.     

The prognostic significance of resection of primary tumor in gastric and colorectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastasis

The significance of primary tumor resection in gastric and colorectal cancer patients with liver metastasis (H(+)) was evaluated in terms of operative mortality and survival rate by dividing the materials [293 gastric cancer and 80 colorectal cancer patients (53 colon and 27 rectum) with synchronous liver metastasis] into the following groups: Firstly, with or without peritoneal dissemination (P), secondly, with or without resection of the primary tumor and thirdly, with or without postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. The following results were obtained: (1) The direct operative death rate of primary tumor resection, excluding death from other causes, showed an absence of statistically significant differences between the P₀H(+) and P(+)H(+) gastric and colorectal cancer patients. (2) There was no significance in the prognosis between the primary tumor resection + postoperative chemotherapy group and the non-resectable group in the P(+)H(+) gastric and colorectal cancer patients, revealing no prognostic value of the primary tumor. (3) In the P₀H(+) gastric and colorectal cancer patients, the primary tumor resection + postoperative chemotherapy group was significantly more favorable in prognosis than was the primary tumor resection alone group or the non-resectable group, showing the value of primary tumor resection.     

Most Important Lymph Node Information in Gastric Cancer: Multivariate Prognostic Study

Background: In gastric cancer, the level and number of lymph node metastases is useful for predicting survival, and there are several staging systems for lymph node metastasis. The aim of this study was to compare the several lymph node classifications and to clarify the most important lymph node information associated with prognosis using multivariate analysis.Methods: A total of 106 patients with histologically node-positive gastric cancer treated by radical gastrectomy and extended lymph node dissection (D2, D3) were studied. The level of lymph node metastasis was categorized simply as Level I nodes (perigastric, No.1–6), Level II nodes (intermediate, No.7–9), and Level III nodes (distant, No.10–16), irrespective of the tumor location. The Level II nodes included lymph nodes along the left gastric artery, common hepatic artery, and celiac trunk.Results: Overall 5-year survival rate was 51%. Univariate analysis showed that 5-year survival rate was significantly influenced by the level of positive nodes (P < .01), total number of positive nodes (P < .01), number of positive Level I nodes (P < .01), and number of positive Level II nodes (P < .01), in addition to the tumor location (P < .05), tumor size (P < .05), gross type (P < .01), and depth of wall invasion (P < .01). Of these, independent prognostic factors associated with 5-year survival rate were the number of positive Level II nodes (0–1 vs. 2) (62% vs. 19%, P < .01) and the depth of wall invasion (within vs. beyond muscularis) (79% vs. 43%, P < .01).Conclusions: Among several staging systems for lymph node metastases, the number of positive Level II nodes provided the most powerful prognostic information in patients with node-positive gastric cancer. When there were two or more metastases in the Level II nodes, prognosis was poor even after D2 or D3 gastrectomy.     

Tumor volume: a novel prognostic factor in patients who undergo curative resection for gastric cancer

Background and aims: The present study evaluates the significance of tumor volume as a prognostic factor in gastric cancer. Patients/methods: Tumor volume was measured from serial tissue sections of 101 patients who had undergone curative resection for solitary carcinoma of the stomach using a computer graphics analysis program. These patients were analyzed with respect to survival based on uni- variate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological factors, including tumor volume, to determine an independent prognostic factor. Results: Significant differences in survival were found with respect to depth of tumor invasion (P=0.001), status of lymph-node metastasis (P=0.018), tumor diameter (P=0.005), and tumor volume (P<0.0001) based on univariate analysis. However, multivariate analysis indicated only tumor volume as a valid factor in determining prognosis among the nine variables and was significantly associated with the prognosis (P=0.0005; relative risk 18.23; 95% confidence interval 3.52–94.37). Conclusion: The present findings indicate that tumor volume is an important prognostic factor in patients who undergo curative resection for gastric cancer and may be an alternative to conventional factors, thus providing a novel independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer. Received: 11 January 2000 Accepted: 16 January 2000     

超声引导下经皮射频消融治疗多囊肝病的有效性及安全性

目的 观察超声引导下经皮射频消融（RFA）治疗多囊肝病（PLD）的有效性及安全性。方法 回顾性分析14例接受超声引导RFA治疗的PLD患者,观察术后症状改善及并发症情况;比较术前与术后1周肝功能及术前与术后12个月肝内囊肿总体积。结果 14例中,13例顺利完成RFA,1例因术中出血而中止治疗;术后即刻患者腹胀较术前明显好转,术后1周症状明显缓解率92.31%（12/13）;术中及术后未见严重不良反应。术前与术后1周丙氨酸转氨酶（ALT）、天冬氨酸转氨酶（AST）及总胆红素（TBIL）水平差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。术后12个月肝内囊肿总体积较术前显著缩小（P<0.05）。结论 超声引导下经皮RFA治疗PLD效果较好,且安全性较高。