【摘要】 目的比较mRECIST和RECIST评价标准,为肝癌经肝动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)疗效评价选择更为合适的CT应用方法。方法对62例原发性肝癌TACE后,采用mRECIST标准和RECIST标准分别进行对比研究。TACE前、后CT检查均采用三期扫描,强调动脉期强化的存活肿瘤的测量,根据mRECIST和RECIST评价标准分别评估缓解程度。两种方法评价缓解率的比较采用χ2检验。结果采用mRECIST标准评价肝癌TACE后完全缓解(CR)为8例、部分缓解(PR)为28例、稳定(SD)为14例、进展(PD)为12例,缓解率为58.1%;采用RECIST标准评价的CR为0例、PR为14例、SD为37例、PD为11例,缓解率为22.6%,经χ2检验,P<0.01,二者有显著性差异。结论采用mRECIST标准对原发性肝癌TACE作疗效评价,特别是强调治疗后动脉期强化的存活肿瘤的测量,能客观反映肿瘤的退缩和缓解率,对决定后续治疗很有帮助。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To compare mRECIST and RECIST criteria with CT in evaluation of patient treated with TACE for HCC,and choose more appropriate CT application criteria.Methods 62 cases of HCC after TACE with the evaluation of mRECIST and RECIST were respectively compared.According to mRECIST and RECIST criteria,response rate was used to emphasize on measurement of enhanced viable tumor in arterial phase by CT scan with three phases before and after TACE.The response rate was evaluated with χ2 test by both methods.Results The evaluation of mRECIST in HCC after TACE for CR was 8,PR was 28,SD was 14,PD was 12,response rate was 58.1%;The evaluation of RECIST in HCC after TACE for CR was 0,PR was 14,SD was 37,PD was 11,response rate was 22.6%(with χ2 test,P< 0.01),and both methods had significant differences.Conclusion With evaluation of mRECIST for HCC after TACE,especially the emphasis on measurement of enhanced viable tumor in arterial phase by CT scan is taken,which can reflect the objective tumor response rate and is helpful to further treatment.更多还原