...
首页> 外文期刊>Oncology letters >Comparing cryoablation and microwave ablation for the treatment of patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer
【24h】

Comparing cryoablation and microwave ablation for the treatment of patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer

机译:比较冷冻和微波消融治疗IIIB / IV非小细胞肺癌患者的治疗方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The aim of the present study was to compare the safety and efficacy of cryoablation (CA) and microwave ablation (MWA) as treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC treated with CA (n=45) or MWA (n=56) were enrolled in the present study. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) time and adverse events (AEs). The median PFS times between the two groups were not significantly different (P=0.36): CA, 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5-12.4] vs. MWA, 11 months (95% CI, 9.5-12.4). The OS times between the two groups were also not significantly different (P=0.07): CA, 27.5 months (95% CI, 22.8-31.2 months) vs. MWA, 18 months (95% CI, 12.5-23.5). For larger tumors (>3 cm), patients treated with MWA had significantly longer median PFS (P=0.04; MWA, 10.5 months vs. CA, 7.0 months) and OS times (P=0.04; MWA, 24.5 months vs. CA, 14.5 months) compared patients treated with CA. However, for smaller tumors ( 0.05). The number of applicators, tumor size and length of the lung traversed by applicators were associated with a higher risk of pneumothorax and intra-pulmonary hemorrhage in the two groups. Treatment with CA resulted in significantly less intraprocedural pain compared with treatment with MWA (P=0.001). Overall, the present study demonstrated that CA and MWA were comparably safe and effective procedures for the treatment of small tumors. However, treatment with MWA was superior compared with CA for the treatment of large tumors.
机译:本研究的目的是将冷冻剂(CA)和微波消融(MWA)的安全性和有效性与非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的治疗进行比较。在本研究中注册了用Ca(n = 45)或MWA(n = 56)处理的IIIB阶段或IV NSCLC的患者。主要终点是无进展的存活率(PFS);次要终点包括整体存活(OS)时间和不良事件(AES)。两组之间的中值PFS时间没有显着差异(p = 0.36):Ca,10个月[95%置信区间(CI),7.5-12.4]与MWA,11个月(95%CI,9.5-12.4) 。两组之间的OS时间也没有显着差异(p = 0.07):Ca,27.5个月(95%CI,22.8-31.2个月)与MWA,18个月(95%CI,12.5-23.5)。对于较大的肿瘤(> 3cm),用MWA治疗的患者具有明显更长的中位数PFS(P = 0.04; MWA,10.5个月与CA,7.0个月)和OS时间(P = 0.04; MWA,24.5个月与CA, 14.5个月)与CA治疗的患者进行比较。但是,对于较小的肿瘤(0.05)。涂抹器遍历的施用器的数量,肿瘤大小和长度与两组肺炎植物和肺内出血的风险较高有关。与MWA的治疗相比,用Ca治疗导致颅腺间疼痛显着降低(P = 0.001)。总体而言,本研究表明,CA和MWA对小肿瘤的治疗相当安全和有效的程序。然而,与MWA的治疗与用于治疗大肿瘤的CA相比优越。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号