CAJ | 학술논문

目的：对腹腔热灌注联合静脉化疗和单纯静脉患者在晚期胃肠道肿瘤患者临床效果进行比较。方法选择2009年1月~2010年12月湖北医药学院附属襄阳医院120例晚期胃肠道肿瘤患者，分为观察组和对照组，每组各60例。对照组患者单以静脉化疗进行治疗，观察组在对照组的基础上使用腹腔热灌注进行治疗。对比两组患者治疗效果、生存期、不良反应以及免疫功能的变化。结果观察组治疗有效率为71.7豫(43/60)，对照组有效率为46.7豫(28/60)，两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；观察组患者三年生存率为83.3豫，平均生存时间为(32.98±1.83)个月，都显著高于对照组的61.7%，(28.65±1.91)个月，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；两组不良反应率比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；治疗后观察组患者CD3+T细胞、CD4+T细胞水平明显增加，CD8+T细胞水平明显减小，与治疗前比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；对照组患者后CD3+T细胞、CD4+T细胞、CD8+T细胞的水平与治疗前比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论相比于单纯静脉化疗，腹腔热灌注联合静脉化疗术能有效对晚期胃肠道肿瘤患者进行治疗，治疗有效率高、预后患者生存率高、不良反应率低。
목적：대복강열관주연합정맥화료화단순정맥환자재만기위장도종류환자림상효과진행비교。방법선택2009년1월~2010년12월호북의약학원부속양양의원120례만기위장도종류환자，분위관찰조화대조조，매조각60례。대조조환자단이정맥화료진행치료，관찰조재대조조적기출상사용복강열관주진행치료。대비량조환자치료효과、생존기、불량반응이급면역공능적변화。결과관찰조치료유효솔위71.7예(43/60)，대조조유효솔위46.7예(28/60)，량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)；관찰조환자삼년생존솔위83.3예，평균생존시간위(32.98±1.83)개월，도현저고우대조조적61.7%，(28.65±1.91)개월，차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)；량조불량반응솔비교，차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)；치료후관찰조환자CD3+T세포、CD4+T세포수평명현증가，CD8+T세포수평명현감소，여치료전비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)；대조조환자후CD3+T세포、CD4+T세포、CD8+T세포적수평여치료전비교，차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)。결론상비우단순정맥화료，복강열관주연합정맥화료술능유효대만기위장도종류환자진행치료，치료유효솔고、예후환자생존솔고、불량반응솔저。
Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy comparison of CHPP combined with etoposide and single e-toposide on the treatment for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods From January 2009 to December 2010, in Xiangyang Hospital Affiliated to Hubei University of Medicine, 120 patients were selected and divided into control group and observation group, with 60 cases in each group. Patients in control group were treated by etoposide; patients in observation group were treated by CHPP, combined with etoposide. The clinical efficacy, survival, adverse reactions rate and immune function changes of two groups were compared. Results The effectiveness rate of observation group was 71.7%(43/60), the effectiveness rate of control group was 46.7%(28/60), the difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). Survival rate and survival time of observation group was 83.3% and (32.98±1.83) months, which were sig-nificantly higher than those of control group [61.7% and (28.65±1.91) months], the differences were statistically signifi-cant (P< 0.05). Adverse reactions rate of two group was no statistically significant (P>0.05),. After treatment, levels of CD3+T cell and CD4+T cell in observation group were significantly higher than those before treatment, CD8+T cell level was significantly lower than that of before treatment, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The CD3+T, CD4+T, CD8+T level of control group changed little, compared with those before the treatment, the differences were no statis-tically significant (P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with etoposide, CHPP combined with etoposide can effective treat patients with advanced gastric cancer. The efficacy is higher, survival rate after treatment is higher, and the adverse re-actions rate is lower.