Clinical Research Of Uterine Artery Intraarterial Chemotherapy Plus Embolization For Cervical Cancer Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Objective:By comparing the clinical efficacy of the neoadjuvant chemotherapy for different drug delivery methods, to explore the value of the uterine interventional embolization chemotherapy for cervical cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and it’s influence on patients with cervical cancer radical surgery, if it can improve the patient’s survival rate and quality of life after curative effect or not. To aid the clinicians to comprehensive evaluation in the clinical work, according to the patient’s condition, economic condition and the technique of hospital equipment, to help the clinicians choice the more scientificer and reasonabler ways of chemotherapy. It has a great guiding significance for improve the security of surgery and prognosis.Methods:Were retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of90patients with locally advanced cervical cancer, the patients were divided into two groups follow to the route of administration, line of preoperative arterial perfusion chemotherapy and intubation embolization (Interventional embolization chemotherapy group)44cases, preoperative systemic vein chemotherapy (Intravenous chemotherapy group)46cases. Comparison of clinical curative effect, adverse reactions, operation conditions, pathological changes and the forward curative effect between Interventional embolization chemotherapy group and intravenous chemotherapy group.Results:The vaginal breeding remission rate of interyentional embolization chemotherapy group (100%) than intravenous chemotherapy group (91.3%) higher, there was statistically significant difference between the two groups (P=0.001). In addition, the intraoperatve blood soss of intravenous chemotherapy group is (539.1±318.1) ml, interventional embolization chemotherapy group is (342.7±157.7) ml, there was significant difference between the two groups (P=0.000). Two groups of overall response rate, adverse reactions, surgery time and postoperative pathological changes were similar, there was not statistically significant difference (P>0.05); Interventional embolization chemotherapy group’s3,5-year survival rates were89%,85%, the recurrence rate was15.9%; the intravenous chemotherapy group’s3,5-year survival rates were79%,79%, the recurrence rate was21.7%; There was not statistically significant difference (P>0.05); There was no significant difference between two groups of survival curve (P>0.05).Conclusion:Two neoadjuvant chemotherapy methods are better in the near future curative effect to treat cervical cancer, the Interventional embolization chemotherapy can improve the vaginal breeding response rate, and reduce the intraoperatve blood soss. but the interventional embolization chemotherapy failed to reduce the recurrence rate and improve patients’3,5-year survival rate.