摘要
目的比较肝移植符合米兰标准和符合杭州标准肝细胞癌患者的预后。方法回顾性分析100例肝移植患者临床资料。结果符合杭州标准者100例,其中符合米兰标准者33例,超出米兰标准但符合杭州标准67例。入选杭州标准的患者生存时间与入选米兰标准的患者生存时间比较差别无统计学意义(P=0.314),二者与超出米兰标准但符合杭州标准的患者比较差别也无统计学意义(P=0.125,P=0.100)。符合杭州标准+无镜下微癌栓的患者的术后生存时间显著长于符合杭州标准+有镜下微癌栓的患者(P=0.000);符合米兰标准+无镜下微癌栓的患者术后生存时间与符合杭州标准+无镜下微癌栓的患者比较差别无统计学意义(P=0.062)。结论杭州标准适用范围更广,更适合我国使用;在此标准的基础上,根据肿瘤的大小及分化程度进行判断是否存在镜下微癌栓,优先考虑无镜下微癌栓,将显著增加术后生存时间。
Objective To compared the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma using Milan criteria or Hangzhou criteria of liver transplantation. Methods The clinical data of one hundred and seventy-five cases of liver transplantation were Retrospectively analyzed. Results Among the cases,one huandred cases fitted the Hangzhou criteria,thirty-three cases fitted the Milan criteria,sixty-seven cases were beyond the Milan criteria but still fitted the Hangzhou criteria.There was no significant difference in the survival time in the three groups（P=0.314,P=0.125,P=0.100）.Based on Hangzhou criteria,the survival time of patients without micro-embolism was longer than that of patients with micro-embolism（P=0.000）.There was no significant difference in the survival time between the patients without micro-embolism which fitted Milan criteria and Hangzhou criteria（P=0.062）. Conclusion Hangzhou criteria is more suitable for use in China because of wide serviceable range,basis on this standard,giving priority to no micro-embolism will significantly increase the overall survival time after surgery according to the size and differentiation grade of the tumor.
出处
《新乡医学院学报》
CAS
2011年第5期617-618,621,共3页
Journal of Xinxiang Medical University
关键词
肝细胞癌
肝移植
杭州标准
米兰标准
镜下微血管癌栓
生存期
hepatocellular carcinoma
liver transplantation
Hangzhou criteria
Milan criteria
micro-embolism under microscope
survival time
