李健, 黄赖机, 张秀萍, 甘露, 万跃, 杨家祥. 乳腺癌保留乳房治疗的放射损伤与美容效果[J]. 中国肿瘤临床, 2005, 32(13): 742-744.
引用本文: 李健, 黄赖机, 张秀萍, 甘露, 万跃, 杨家祥. 乳腺癌保留乳房治疗的放射损伤与美容效果[J]. 中国肿瘤临床, 2005, 32(13): 742-744.
Li Jian, Huang Lai-ji, Zhang Xiu-ping, . Radiation Injury and Cosmetic Results of Breast Conserving Treatment[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2005, 32(13): 742-744.
Citation: Li Jian, Huang Lai-ji, Zhang Xiu-ping, . Radiation Injury and Cosmetic Results of Breast Conserving Treatment[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2005, 32(13): 742-744.

乳腺癌保留乳房治疗的放射损伤与美容效果

Radiation Injury and Cosmetic Results of Breast Conserving Treatment

  • 摘要: 目的: 评价乳腺癌保留乳房治疗采用不同补量放射治疗技术所致的乳房放射损伤及其美容效果。 方法: 回顾性分析了1990年3月~1996年5月51例Ⅰ~Ⅱ期行保留乳房治疗乳腺癌患者。本组分为高剂量率近距离照射补量组(A组),外照射补量组(B组)。全部患者均接受肿瘤局部切除术+同侧腋窝淋巴结清扫术,随后行乳房两切线野照46Gy。在近距离治疗组,瘤床采用铱-192高剂量率后装插植治疗16~20Gy,分1~3次完成。在外照射组,采用9~17MeV电子束行瘤床局部照射,剂量为20Gy按常规分割治疗。患者随访5年以上。 结果: 五年生存率A、B两组分别为90.00%和87.09%(P>0.05)。两组患者在急性放射损伤方面,A组有6例出现≥3度局部皮肤及皮下组织损伤,其发生率为30.0%(6/20)。而B组发生率为6.5%(2/31)。其差别有显著性(P<0.05)。在乳房美容效果方面也有差别(P<0.05),其中近距离治疗组优良率为60%(12/20),而外照射组优良率为87.1%(27/31)。 结论: 在乳腺癌保留乳房治疗中,不同补量方法在生存率方面差别无显著性。而外照射补量方法的急性放射损伤发生率更低,因而在美容效果上优于近距离后装插植治疗补量方法。

     

    Abstract: Objective : To investigate the acute radiation injury and the cosmetic results of conservative treatment of breast cancer using various methods of boost irradiation. Methods : Fifty-one patients with early breast cancer treated by conservative surgery plus radiation therapy, from 1990 to 1990, were analyzed retrospectively. The cases were divided into two groups, i.e. 20 cases with brachytherapy boost irradiation (group A) and 31 cases with electron beam boost irradiation (group B).All the patients received external irradiation 46Gy/23F/4.6W with two tangential fields following tumorectomy + axillary lymph node dissection. In group A, Iridium 192 HDR implants was used for tumor bed boost irradiation 14-20Gy/1 -3F. In group B, the boost was given 20Gy/10F/2W by 9-17 Me Velectron beam. The patients were followed-up periodically over 5 years. Results : The 5 -year survival rate was 90.0% in group A and 87.09% in group B (P>0.05). In acute radiation injury, there were 6 cases with local dermatic injury of ≥ 3 grade in group A, the incidence was 30.0%(6/20) and 2 cases in group B, the incidence was 6.5%(2/31) (P<0.05). The cosmetic effect was different between the groups;the rate of excellency for brachytherapy group (group A) was 60.0% (12/20) and 87.1% (27/31) in group B (P<0.05). Conclusion : The 5-year survival rate has no difference between the groups. But the rate of the radiation injury is lower in the group using electron beam boost and the cosmetic result is better than that using Iridium 192 HDR implant.

     

/

返回文章
返回