Suppr超能文献

基于人群的比较:头颈部癌症患者接受同期放化疗时两种置管方法:预防性置管方法有害还是有益?

Population-based comparison of two feeding tube approaches for head and neck cancer patients receiving concurrent systemic-radiation therapy: is a prophylactic feeding tube approach harmful or helpful?

机构信息

Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency - Vancouver Centre, 600 West 10th Ave, Vancouver, V5Z4E6, BC, Canada,

出版信息

Support Care Cancer. 2013 Dec;21(12):3433-9. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1936-y. Epub 2013 Aug 16.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare patient outcomes between a therapeutic versus a prophylactic gastrostomy tube (GT) placement approach in patients treated with concurrent systemic and radiation (SRT) therapy for head and neck cancer (HNC).

METHODS

Outcomes were compared between all HNC patients treated with concurrent SRT from January 2001 to June 2009 from a center that only places GTs therapeutically when clinically necessary (center A) versus a center that generally places them prophylactically (center B).

RESULTS

A total of 445 patients with HNC were identified, with 63 % from center A. As anticipated, GTs were placed less commonly in center A compared to B (31 versus 88 %; p < 0.001). Center B had a significantly higher number of GT complications (p < 0.001), including infection (16 versus 5 %), leakage (10 versus 2 %), and blockage (3 versus 1 %). Conversely, center A had a higher admission rate (27 versus 13 %, p = 0.001), most prominent for GT-related issues (15 versus 6 %). Center B had higher GT dependence at 90 days post-radiation therapy (34 versus 12 %; p < 0.001), but not at 1 year (11 versus 10 %; p = 0.74). There was no significant difference in the proportion of head and neck patients who had a 10 % weight loss at 1 year (compared to baseline) between centers A and B (42 versus 53 %, p = 0.07). There was no significant difference in the overall survival (A versus B, HR = 0.99; p = 0.96).

CONCLUSION

A prophylactic GT approach results in exposing higher number of patients to GT complications. The higher rate of hospitalizations using a therapeutic approach suggests that patients are sicker when GTs are required. Given the similar weight loss and survival, a therapeutic approach at an earlier stage of need may be a preferable approach, when access to prompt GT placement is available.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较头颈部癌症(HNC)患者接受同期放化疗(SRT)治疗时,采用治疗性与预防性胃造口管(GT)置管方法的患者结局。

方法

比较 2001 年 1 月至 2009 年 6 月期间,仅在临床需要时行 GT 置管的中心(A 中心)与常规行预防性 GT 置管的中心(B 中心)所有接受同期 SRT 治疗的 HNC 患者的结局。

结果

共纳入 445 例 HNC 患者,其中 63%来自 A 中心。与 B 中心相比,A 中心 GT 置管的比例明显较低(31%比 88%;p<0.001)。B 中心 GT 并发症发生率显著较高(p<0.001),包括感染(16%比 5%)、漏液(10%比 2%)和堵塞(3%比 1%)。相反,A 中心的住院率较高(27%比 13%,p=0.001),尤其是 GT 相关问题(15%比 6%)。B 中心在 SRT 治疗后 90 天 GT 依赖率较高(34%比 12%;p<0.001),但在 1 年时则无差异(11%比 10%;p=0.74)。A、B 两中心在 1 年时(与基线相比)头颈部患者体重减轻 10%的比例无显著差异(42%比 53%,p=0.07)。总生存无显著差异(A 比 B,HR=0.99;p=0.96)。

结论

预防性 GT 置管方法使更多患者暴露于 GT 并发症风险中。采用治疗性 GT 置管方法的住院率较高提示,当需要 GT 时患者的病情更为严重。鉴于相似的体重减轻和生存情况,当能及时获得 GT 置管时,在需要的早期阶段采用治疗性方法可能是一种更可取的方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验