摘要
Chronic haemorrhagic radiation proctitis(CHRP) is a difficult problem faced by the patients following radiation for pelvic malignancy. There is no standardtreatment for this condition, but many methods of treatment are available. The aim of this study was to review the literature to see whether there is an improvement in the available evidence in comparison with previously published systematic reviews in treating patients with CHRP. The Pub Med/Medline database and Google Scholar search was selectively searched. Studies, which treated patients with rectal bleeding due to chronic radiation proctitis or CHRP, were included. Seventy studies were finally selected out of which 14 were randomized controlled clinical trials. Though these studies could not be compared, it could be seen that there was an improvement in the methodology of the studies. There was an objective assessment of symptoms, signs and an objective assessment of outcomes. But, still, there were only a few studies that looked into the quality of life following treatment of CHRP. To increase recruitment to trials, a national registry of cases with established late radiation toxicity would facilitate the further improvement of such studies. Some of the conclusions that could be reached based on the available evidence are 4% formalin should be the first line treatment for patients with CHRP. Formalin and argon plasma coagulation(APC) are equally effective, but formalin is better for severe disease. Refractory patients, not responding to formalin or APC, need to be referred for hyperbaric oxygen therapy or surgery. Radio-frequency ablation is a promising modality that needs to be studied further in randomized trials.
Chronic haemorrhagic radiation proctitis(CHRP) is a difficult problem faced by the patients following radiation for pelvic malignancy. There is no standardtreatment for this condition, but many methods of treatment are available. The aim of this study was to review the literature to see whether there is an improvement in the available evidence in comparison with previously published systematic reviews in treating patients with CHRP. The Pub Med/Medline database and Google Scholar search was selectively searched. Studies, which treated patients with rectal bleeding due to chronic radiation proctitis or CHRP, were included. Seventy studies were finally selected out of which 14 were randomized controlled clinical trials. Though these studies could not be compared, it could be seen that there was an improvement in the methodology of the studies. There was an objective assessment of symptoms, signs and an objective assessment of outcomes. But, still, there were only a few studies that looked into the quality of life following treatment of CHRP. To increase recruitment to trials, a national registry of cases with established late radiation toxicity would facilitate the further improvement of such studies. Some of the conclusions that could be reached based on the available evidence are 4% formalin should be the first line treatment for patients with CHRP. Formalin and argon plasma coagulation(APC) are equally effective, but formalin is better for severe disease. Refractory patients, not responding to formalin or APC, need to be referred for hyperbaric oxygen therapy or surgery. Radio-frequency ablation is a promising modality that needs to be studied further in randomized trials.
