论文部分内容阅读
目的比较局部晚期宫颈癌(LACC)动脉新辅助化疗和全身静脉新辅助化疗的卫生经济学状况。方法选择2008年1月至2012年12月南方医科大学南方医院妇科住院行手术前新辅助化疗的LACC患者68例,按其化疗途径分为动脉化疗组(36例)和静脉化疗组(32例)。比较两组化疗近期疗效、疗程、不良反应及卫生经济学指标。结果两组化疗近期有效率相比较差异无统计学意义(91.66%vs.93.75%,P>0.05);静脉化疗组胃肠道反应和骨髓抑制作用均重于动脉化疗组(43.75%vs.33.33%,40.6%vs.13.89%,P<0.05);静脉化疗组化疗期间总住院费用、药物费用、总住院时间、总化疗时间、首次化疗距手术时间均显著高于动脉化疗组(P<0.01)。结论动脉新辅助化疗与静脉新辅助化疗近期疗效相当,但动脉新辅助化疗疗程短、不良反应少、住院费用及住院时间明显降低,符合卫生经济学的要求,是一种有效、经济的新辅助化疗方法。
Objective To compare the hygienic economics of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and intravenous neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). Methods Sixty-eight patients with LACC undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy in Nanfang Hospital of Southern Medical University from January 2008 to December 2012 were divided into arterial chemotherapy group (36 cases) and intravenous chemotherapy group (32 cases ). The curative effect, course of treatment, adverse reaction and health economics index of the two groups were compared. Results There was no significant difference in the recent efficacy between the two groups (91.66% vs.93.75%, P> 0.05). The gastrointestinal reactions and myelosuppression in the intravenous chemotherapy group were significantly higher than those in the arterial chemotherapy group (43.75% vs.33.33 %, 40.6% vs.13.89%, P <0.05). The total cost of hospitalization, cost of medication, total length of stay, total duration of chemotherapy, and time to first chemotherapy were significantly higher in intravenous chemotherapy group than those in arterial chemotherapy group ). Conclusions Arterial neoadjuvant chemotherapy is similar to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the near future, but its short course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, fewer adverse reactions, hospitalization costs and hospitalization time are obviously lower, which is consistent with the requirements of health economics and is an effective and economical new aid Chemotherapy methods.