Compared The Curative Effect Of Different Treatment In Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

Objective: Ovarian cancer is often one of the malignant tumors of female genital organs;the mortality is on the first place. The incidence has been increasing in the recent years. Oncethe ovarian cancer recurrent, the cure rate will be very low. How to reasonable and effectivetreat the recurrent ovarian cancer, has become one of the key points to treat the ovarian cancer.In this study, the patients were grouped according to different factors, and then compare thetwo treatment schemes with survival and quality of life of patients after recurrence.Establishment of this study is in order to provide evidence-based basis to the standardized andindividualized treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer. Method: To select64patients those arediagnosed as recurrent ovarian cancer in General Hospital of Ningxia Medical Universityfrom Jan.2005to Dec.2012. The collected cases were grouped according to the factors suchas: postoperative pathological, the first operation situation, postoperative chemotherapy,progression-free survival and ascites, and then compare the different between salvagechemotherapy and secondary cytoreductive surgery combined with chemotherapy withsurvival and quality of life of patients after recurrence. At the same time, I grouped thepatients who underwent secondary cytoreductive surgery according to the secondarycytoreductive surgery situation, and then compare the different about chemotherapy withsurvival and quality of life of patients after recurrence. Result: early phase: Analysis ofvariance, the survival time-after relapse and QOL between two different treatment of therecurrent ovarian cancer were significantly differences （P<0.05）; later period：in this group，the survival period after recurrence and QOL didn’t have significant difference（P>0.05）. Initial surgical procedure in diameter <₂cm residual tumors: the survival time-after relapsebetween two different treatment of the recurrent ovarian cancer were significantly differences（P<0.05），while the QOL didn’t have significant difference（P>0.05）.Standard chemotherapy:the survival time-after relapse between two different treatment of the recurrent ovarian cancerwere significantly differences （P<0.05）,while the QOL didn’t have significantdifference（P>0.05）. Progression-free survival≥12months：the survival time-after relapse andQOL between two different treatment of the recurrent ovarian cancer were significantlydifferences （P<0.05）; Progression-free survival＜12months：in this group，the survival periodafter recurrence and QOL didn’t have significant difference（P>0.05）. The volume of ascites≥500ml group：in this group，the survival period after recurrence and QOL didn’t havesignificant difference（P>0.05）；The volume of ascites＜500ml group：the survival time-afterrelapse and QOL between two different treatment of the recurrent ovarian cancer weresignificantly differences （P<0.05）. Analysis of patients with secondary cytoreductive surgery,the survival time-after relapse, QOL and overall survival periods between two groups of therecurrent ovarian cancer were significantly differences （P<0.05）. Conclusions:1. Give therecurrent ovarian cancer patients who initial diagnosis as early phase, initial surgicalprocedure in diameter<₂cm residual tumors combined with standard chemotherapy,progression-free survival≥12months and the volume of ascites＜500ml secondarycytoreductive surgery will significantly improve the survival time and quality after recurrence;while the recurrent ovarian cancer patients who initial diagnosis as later phase, initial surgicalprocedure in diameter＞2cm residual tumors, progression-free survival＜12months and thevolume of ascites＞500ml show no significant difference between secondary cytoreductivesurgery and salvage chemotherapy.2. Give recurrent ovarian cancer patients whose secondarysurgical procedure in diameter <₂cm residual tumors cytoreductive surgery can significantlyprolong the survival time and quality of life after recurrence and overall survival periods.