国际肿瘤学杂志

国际肿瘤学杂志 ›› 2015, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (10): 738-742.doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-422X.2015.10.005

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

G4射波刀治疗大肝癌后肝功能评价

张金龙,薛慧,梁雪峰,万芝清,常小云,张健,韩萍,李玉   

  1. 100039 北京，解放军第三〇二医院肿瘤放射治疗中心
  • 出版日期:2015-10-08 发布日期:2015-09-08
  • 通讯作者: 韩萍 E-mail:hanp1966@sina.com

Evaluation of liver function after G4 cyberknife treatment of large hepatocellular carcinoma

Zhang Jinlong, Xue Hui, Liang Xuefeng, Wan Zhiqing, Chang Xiaoyun, Zhang Jian, Han Ping, Li Yu   

  1. Radiation Oncology Center, 302 Hospital of PLA, Beijing 100039, China
  • Online:2015-10-08 Published:2015-09-08
  • Contact: Han Ping E-mail:hanp1966@sina.com

PDF

1372

被引次数

1

摘要： 目的 探讨G4射波刀治疗大肝癌后肝功能情况，评估其治疗安全性。方法 回顾性分析63例行G4射波刀治疗大肝癌患者，比较放疗前与放疗后肝功能情况，并行统计学分析。结果G4射波刀治疗后12个月谷丙转氨酶（ALT）、碱性磷酸酶（ALP）、总胆红素（TBIL）、活动度（PA）分别为23.00 U/L、111.00 U/L、13.70 μmol/L、(81.87±13.94)%，与治疗前［28.00 U/L、32.00 U/L、11.30 μmol/L、(86.07±14.07)%］相比差异均无统计学意义（Z=-1.677，P=0.094；Z=-0.504，P=0.614； Z=-1.945，P=0.053；t=1.271，P=0.213）。G4射波刀治疗后12个月白蛋白（ALB）为(34.84±4.75)g/L，较治疗前［(37.45±4.14)g/L］下降，差异有统计学意义（t=3.357，P=0.002）。G4射波刀治疗后12个月肝功能ChildPugh分级为5.80±1.17，与治疗前（5.48±0.81）相比差异无统计学意义（t=-1.668，P=0.106）。结论 G4射波刀治疗大肝癌未引起肝功能损伤，安全、可靠，值得临床广泛推广。

关键词: 肝肿瘤, 放射疗法, 射波刀, 肝功能

Abstract: Objective To explore the influence of G4 cyberknife treatment of large hepatocellular carcinoma on liver function, and to evaluate its treatment safety. Methods Sixtythree large liver cancer patients treated with routine G4 cyberknife treatment were retrospectively analyzed, and then statistical analysis of the difference in liver function before and after treatment was conducted.  Results After G4 cyberknife treatment of 12 months, the levels of ALT, ALP, TBIL, PA were respectively 23.00 U/L, 111.00 U/L, 13.70 μmol/L, (81.87±13.94)%. Compared with the levels before treatment ［28.00 U/L, 32.00 U/L, 11.30 μmol/L, (86.07±14.07)%］, there were no significant differences found (Z=-1.677， P=0.094； Z=-0.504， P=0.614； Z=-1.945， P=0.053; t=1.271, P=0.213). The level of ambumin was (34.84±4.75)g/L at 12 months after treatment, which decreased and the difference compared with the level before treatment ［(37.45±4.14)g/L］ was significant (t=3.357, P=0.002). The ChildPugh grade was 5.80±1.17 respectively at the time points of 12 months after treatment, and no significant difference was found compared with the ChildPugh grade before treatment (5.48±0.81, t=-1.668, P=0.106). Conclusion G4 cyberknife treatment does not cause liver injury. It is safe and reliable in large liver cancer treatment. So, it is worth widely clinical popularizing.

Key words: Liver neoplasms, Radiotherapy, Cyberknife, Liver function