对比经皮射频消融术和经腹腔镜下肝切除术治疗Ⅰa期原发性肝癌的临床效果

肝脏 ›› 2020, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (2): 146-148.

对比经皮射频消融术和经腹腔镜下肝切除术治疗Ⅰa期原发性肝癌的临床效果

王家欢, 李震

438600 湖北省罗田县人民医院普外科(王家欢);武汉大学中南医院肝胆胰外科(李震)

收稿日期:2019-04-03 出版日期:2020-02-29 发布日期:2020-03-26

Clinical efficacy comparison of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and laparoscopic liver resection for the treatment of stage Ia primary liver cancer

WANG Jia-huan¹, LI Zhen²

1. Department of general surgery, luotian county people's hospital, hubei province, huanggang 438600, China;
2. Department of hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery, central south hospital, wuhan university, wuhan 430071, China

Received:2019-04-03 Online:2020-02-29 Published:2020-03-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的对比经皮射频消融术(PRFA)和经腹腔镜下肝切除术治疗Ⅰa期原发性肝癌的临床效果。方法选取罗田县人民医院2015年1月至2017年1月间收治的Ⅰa期原发性肝癌患者114例,采用随机数字法将其分为PRFA组和腔镜组,每组各57例。比较两组患者并发症发生率,治疗前后肝功能水平、生存时间和无瘤生存时间。结果治疗后,PRFA组患者并发症总发生率为7.02%(4/57),腔镜组患者并发症总发生率为24.56%(14/57),差异有统计学意义(χ²=7.00,P<0.05)。治疗前,两组患者血清ALT、AST水平比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗1个月后,两组患者肝功能水平均显著优于治疗前,且PRFA组患者肝功能水平显著优于腔镜组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗后,PRFA组患者生存时间和无瘤生存时间分别为(34.29±2.88)个月和(27.14±4.16)个月,腔镜组患者生存时间和无瘤生存时间分别为(28.30±4.11)个月和(22.67±3.99)个月,PRFA组患者生存时间和无瘤生存时间均显著优于腔镜组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论针对治疗Ia期原发性肝癌,PRFA与经腹腔镜下肝切除术比较,能够更有利于肝功能恢复,从而更加有效延长患者的生存时间和无瘤生存时间,同时降低并发症发生率,值得在临床推广。

关键词: 经皮射频消融术, 经腹腔镜下肝切除术, Ia期原发性肝癌, 生存时间, 肝功能, 安全性

Abstract: Objective To compare the clinical effects of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and laparoscopic liver resection for primary stage Ia hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods A total of 114 patients with stage Ia primary liver cancer admitted to Luotian County People's Hospital from January 2015 to January 2017 were enrolled. The patients were randomly divided into PRFA group and laparoscopic group, with 57 cases in each group. The PRFA group underwent percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, and the laparoscopic group underwent laparoscopic liver resection. The survival time and tumor-free survival time of the two groups were compared. The liver function of the two groups was compared before and after treatment. The complication rate of the two groups was compared. Results After treatment, the total incidence of complications in the PRFA group was 7.02% (4/57), and the total incidence of complications in the laparoscopic group was 24.56% (14/57). The total incidence of complications in the PRFA group. The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in serum ALT and AST levels between the two groups before treatment (P>0.05). After 1 month of treatment, the two groups were treated. The liver function level of patients was significantly better than that before treatment, and the liver function level of patients in PRFA group was significantly better than that of laparoscopic group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). After treatment, the survival time and tumor-free survival time of the patients in the laparoscopic group were (28.30±4.11) months and (22.67±3.99) months, respectively, and the survival time and absence of the patients in the PRFA group were (34.29±2.88) months and (27.14±4.16) months, respectively. The tumor survival time was significantly better than that of the endoscopy group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion For the treatment of stage Ia primary liver cancer, percutaneous radiofrequency ablation is more conducive to liver function recovery than laparoscopic liver resection, which can effectively prolong the survival time and tumor-free survival time, and reduce the incidence of complications is worthy of clinical promotion.

Key words: Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, Laparoscopic liver resection, Stage Ia primary liver cancer, Survival time, Liver function, Safety

王家欢, 李震. 对比经皮射频消融术和经腹腔镜下肝切除术治疗Ⅰa期原发性肝癌的临床效果[J]. 肝脏, 2020, 25(2): 146-148.

WANG Jia-huan, LI Zhen. Clinical efficacy comparison of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and laparoscopic liver resection for the treatment of stage Ia primary liver cancer[J]. Chinese Hepatolgy, 2020, 25(2): 146-148.

参考文献

[1] Beal EW, Dittmar KM, Hanje AJ, et al. Pretransplant locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation of explant pathology and overall survival. Frontiers in Oncology, 2016, 13:143-148.
[2] 中华人民共和国卫生和计划生育委员会医政医管局. 原发性肝癌诊疗规范(2017年版). 传染病信息, 2017, 16:705-720.
[3] 郑可心, 韩冰, 祁兴顺,等. 《2018年美国肝病学会实践指导:肝细胞癌的诊断、分期和管理》摘译. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2018:34:1181-1182.
[4] 广东省抗癌协会肝癌专业委员会. 肝癌多学科综合治疗团队建立——广东专家共识(1). 临床肝胆病杂志, 2014, 34:732-734.
[5] 严翔, 付必莽, 唐波,等. 射频消融术治疗原发性肝癌的临床研究进展. 肝胆胰外科杂志, 2016, 28:87-89.
[6] Karlsen TH, Tacke F. 《The times they are a'changin'》-Positioning the European Association for the Study of the Liver in the changing landscape of hepatology. J Hepatol, 2018,68:873-875.
[7] Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Balassanian R, et al. Breast cancer, version 4.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Jnccn, 2018, 16:310.
[8] Chen ZH, Hong YF, Lin J, et al. Validation and ranking of seven staging systems of hepatocellular carcinoma. Oncology Letters, 2017, 14:705-714.
[9] Chen CH, Wu SS, Hsiu RH. Dysgonomonas capnocytophagoides bacteremia due to liver abscesses after radiofrequency ablation in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 2016, 115:889-890.
[10] 马履翔,张雪松. 超声引导下经皮射频消融治疗小肝癌患者疗效及预后分析. 实用肝脏病杂志, 2019, 22:125-128.
[11] 鄢金柱, 翁鸿, 张超,等. 经皮射频消融与微波消融治疗肝细胞癌有效性与安全性比较的Meta分析. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2018, 34:120-127.
[12] 陈敏山, 陈敏华, 叶胜龙,等. 原发性肝癌局部消融治疗的专家共识. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2011, 16:70-73.
[13] 黄海于, 黎克全. 原发性肝癌的局部消融治疗进展. 现代医药卫生, 2016, 32:1661-1664.
[14] 王细文, 王巍威, 赵宏智,等. 经皮射频消融术与腹腔镜肝癌切除术治疗小肝癌的临床疗效观察. 西部医学, 2017, 29:183-186.
[15] 吴猛, 郑齐超, 李雄,等. 超声造影与CT对肝癌射频消融术疗效的评估. 中华普通外科杂志, 2016, 31:159-160.
[16] 向磊, 秦春宏, 费书珂. 射频消融术治疗肝细胞癌的研究进展. 国际外科学杂志, 2019, 46:140-144.