Alfadhli A A, Alazmi W Mohammed, Ponich T, Howard J M, Prokopiw I, Alaqeel A, Gregor J C
Mubarak Alkabeer Hospital, Aljabrya, Kuwait.
Can J Gastroenterol. 2008 Feb;22(2):129-32. doi: 10.1155/2008/964912.
Chronic radiation proctopathy (CRP) is a troublesome complication of radiotherapy to the pelvis for which current treatment modalities are suboptimal. Currently, the application of formalin to the rectal mucosa (AFR) and thermal ablation with argon plasma coagulation (APC) are the most promising options.
To compare the efficacy and safety of AFR with APC for CRP.
Records of 22 patients (male to female ratio, 19:3; mean age, 74 years) who received either APC or AFR for chronic hematochezia caused by CRP, and who were evaluated and treated between May 1998 and April 2002, were reviewed. Complete evaluations were made three months after completion of each therapeutic modality. Patients were considered to be responders if there was a 10% increase in hemoglobin from baseline or complete normalization of hemoglobin (male patients, higher than 130 g/L; female patients, higher than 115 g/L) without the requirement for blood transfusion.
The mean hemoglobin level before therapy was 107 g/L. Patients received an average of 1.78 sessions for APC and 1.81 sessions for AFR. Eleven patients (50%) were treated with APC alone, eight patients (36%) with AFR alone and three (14%) with both modalities (two with AFR followed by APC, and one with APC followed by AFR). Eleven of 14 patients (79%) in the APC group were responders, compared with three of 11 patients (27%) in the AFR group (P=0.017). In the APC group, seven of 11 responders required only a single session, while in the AFR group, only one patient responded after a single session. Adverse events (nausea, vomiting, flushing, abdominal cramps, rectal pain and fever) occurred in two patients after APC and in nine patients after AFR (P=0.001). In the APC group, the mean hemoglobin level increase was 20 g/L at three months follow-up, compared with 14 g/L in the AFR group.
This retrospective study suggests that APC is more effective and safe than topical AFR to control hematochezia caused by CRP. Further studies are needed to confirm this observation.
慢性放射性直肠炎(CRP)是盆腔放疗令人困扰的并发症,目前的治疗方式效果欠佳。目前,直肠黏膜福尔马林灌注(AFR)和氩离子凝固术(APC)热消融是最有前景的选择。
比较AFR与APC治疗CRP的疗效和安全性。
回顾性分析1998年5月至2002年4月期间接受APC或AFR治疗因CRP导致的慢性便血的22例患者(男女比例为(19:3);平均年龄74岁)的记录。在每种治疗方式结束三个月后进行全面评估。如果血红蛋白水平较基线升高10%或血红蛋白完全恢复正常(男性患者高于130 g/L;女性患者高于115 g/L)且无需输血,则认为患者有反应。
治疗前平均血红蛋白水平为107 g/L。APC组患者平均接受1.78次治疗,AFR组患者平均接受1.81次治疗。11例患者(50%)仅接受了APC治疗,8例患者(36%)仅接受了AFR治疗,3例患者(14%)接受了两种治疗方式(2例先接受AFR后接受APC,1例先接受APC后接受AFR)。APC组14例患者中有11例(79%)有反应,而AFR组11例患者中有3例(27%)有反应((P = 0.017))。在APC组中,11例有反应的患者中有7例仅需接受一次治疗,而在AFR组中,只有1例患者在接受一次治疗后有反应。APC治疗后2例患者出现不良事件(恶心、呕吐、潮红、腹部绞痛、直肠疼痛和发热),AFR治疗后9例患者出现不良事件((P = 0.001))。在APC组,随访三个月时平均血红蛋白水平升高20 g/L,而AFR组为14 g/L。
这项回顾性研究表明,在控制CRP导致的便血方面,APC比局部AFR更有效且更安全。需要进一步研究来证实这一观察结果。