宫颈癌介入化疗与全身静脉化疗的效果比较

目的评价介入化疗与全身静脉化疗在宫颈癌治疗中的应用价值。方法选取Ⅱa～Ⅱb期宫颈癌病人98例，随机分为两组，介入治疗组50例先行介入栓塞化疗及放疗，全身化疗组48例先行全身静脉化疗及放疗，后继行宫颈癌根治术治疗，评定两组的近期效果及不良反应。结果两组病人化疗及放疗均明显有效，临床总有效率分别为76％及50％，两组比较差异有显著性（x^2=7．12，P〈0．05）；术后病理证实介入治疗组疗效亦明显优于全身化疗组（x^2=4．99，P〈0．05）；而术后淋巴结转移率介入治疗组明显低于全身化疗组（x^2=7．02，P〈0．05）；不良反应介入治疗组明显轻于静脉化疗组，差异有显著性（x^2=4．67～11．91，P〈0．05、0．01）。结论宫颈癌介入栓塞化疗联合放疗治疗效果明显优于静脉化疗联合放疗，副作用明显低于静脉化疗联合放疗，是一种可行、有效的宫颈癌辅助治疗手段。

A COMPARISON BETWEEN INTERVENTION CHEMOTHERAPY AND SYSTEMETIC INTRAVENOUS CHEMOTHERAPY FOR CERVICAL CANCER

Objective To assess the value of applying intervention chemotherapy and intravenous chemotherapy for cervi cal cancer. Methods Ninety-eight patients with stage Ⅱ a -Ⅱ b cervical cancer were randomized to group A （intervention group, 50 cases） and group B （intravenous group, 48 cases）. Those in group A were given embolism chemotherapy and radiothera py first; for those in group 13 were given intravenous chemotherapy and radiotherapy. All of whom were followed by radical surgery. The short term effect and adverse reactios were evaluated. Results Obvious efficacy was achieved in both chemo and radiotherapy in both groups, total effctive rate was 76% for group A and 50% for group B, the difference between them being sig nificant （x^2=7.12,P〈0.05）. Pathology confirmed that the efficacy of group A was superior to that of group B （x^2=4.99,P〈 0.05）. Post-operative lymph node metastatic rate was lower in group A than in group B （x^2=7.02,P〈0.05）. Adverse reactions in group A were milder than group B, the difference was significant （x^2 =-4.67-11.91 ;P〈0.05,0.01）. Conclusion The effect of combined intervention chemoembolization with radiotherapy for cervical cancer is better than that of systematic chemotherapy which is a feasible and effective adjunvtive therapy for cervical cancer.