论文部分内容阅读
目的 :肝癌介入治疗时化疗药盒两种不同路径植入法的比较。方法 :对原发性肝癌患者 10 0例 ,随机分两组 ,行右大腿内侧经皮股动脉穿刺植入和前胸经皮左锁骨下动脉穿刺植入各 5 0例。结果 :两种路径的穿刺和植入成功率差异无显著性 (P>0 .0 5 ) ,但股动脉入路组的曝光时间和手术时间均明显短于锁骨下动脉入路组 (P<0 .0 0 1) ;经左锁骨下动脉入路者发生局部血肿 3例和气、血胸各 1例 ,而经股动脉入路组无任何并发症发生。结论 :经皮右股动脉入路比经皮左锁骨下动脉入路的手术时间及曝光时间明显缩短 ,亦无严重并发症发生 ,前者方法简单、安全、易于掌握 ,但当腹腔干及肝动脉呈向前向下走行并扭曲向上者 ,经皮左锁骨下动脉入路是必要的补充
OBJECTIVE: To compare the two methods of implanting chemotherapeutic kits in the interventional treatment of liver cancer. Methods: A total of 100 primary hepatocellular carcinoma patients were randomly divided into two groups. The percutaneous transarterial femoral artery was implanted in the right thigh and the percutaneous left subclavian artery puncture was performed in 50 cases. Results: There was no significant difference between the two methods in the success rate of puncture and implantation (P> 0.05), but the exposure time and operation time of femoral artery approach group were significantly shorter than those of subclavian artery approach group (P < 0 .0 0 1). There were 3 cases of local hematoma and 1 case of gas and hemothorax in the left subclavian artery approach, while no complications occurred in the femoral artery approach group. Conclusion: The percutaneous right femoral artery approach than the percutaneous left subclavian artery approach significantly shorter operative time and exposure time, no serious complications, the former method is simple, safe and easy to grasp, but when the celiac trunk and hepatic artery Was walking forward and down and twist up, percutaneous left subclavian artery access is necessary to add