摘要
目的观察72例高血压脑出血患者微创软通道穿刺引流术与开颅血肿清除术治疗效果。方法方便选取2018年1月—2019年12月该院收治的72例高血压脑出血患者为研究对象,根据治疗方法不同分成对照组(开颅血肿清除术治疗)与观察组(微创软通道穿刺引流术治疗),对两组手术指标、功能恢复情况、并发症发生情况、临床治疗有效情况进行观察比较。结果观察组手术时间(50.36±6.71)min、血肿清除时间(5.07±1.73)d、脑脊液恢复时间(9.25±2.73)d、住院时间(11.08±2.68)d均短于对照组(121.05±10.62)min、(8.99±2.27)d、(14.87±2.63)d、(19.25±3.65)d,差异有统计学意义(t=33.763、8.241、8.895、10.825,P<0.05);观察组术中出血量(2.32±0.89)mL少于对照组(311.44±20.65)mL,差异有统计学意义(t=89.734,P<0.05)。治疗后,观察组神经缺损程度(11.01±2.81)分低于对照组(14.54±3.05)分,差异有统计学意义(t=5.107,P<0.05);观察组日常生活活动能力(71.69±8.64)分高于对照组(50.65±5.58)分,差异有统计学意义(t=12.274,P<0.05);观察组并发症发生率(5.56%)低于对照组(25.00%),差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=5.258,P<0.05);观察组临床治疗有效率91.67%,高于对照组86.11%,但差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.141,P>0.05)。结论在高血压脑出血治疗中,微创软通道穿刺引流术与开颅血肿清除术均具有较高临床治疗率,但相对而言,微创软通道穿刺引流术临床治疗综合效果更好。
Objective To observe the therapeutic effects of minimally invasive soft channel puncture drainage and craniotomy for hematoma removal in 72 patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage.Methods A total of 72 patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage admitted to this hospital from January 2018 to December 2019 were conveniently selected as the research objects.According to different treatment methods,they were divided into a control group(craniotomy hematoma removal treatment)and an observation group(minimally invasive soft channel puncture drainage treatment),to observe and compare the surgical indicators,functional recovery,complications,and clinical treatment effectiveness of the two groups.Results The operation time(50.36±6.71)min,hematoma removal time(5.07±1.73)d,CSF recovery time(9.25±2.73)d,and hospitalization time(11.08±2.68)d in the observation group were shorter than those in the control group(121.05±10.62)min,(8.99±2.27)d,(14.87±2.63)d,(19.25±3.65)d,the difference was statistically significant(t=33.763,8.241,8.895,10.825,P<0.05);intraoperative blood loss in the observation group(2.32±0.89)mL was less than(311.44±20.65)mL in the control group,the difference was statistically significant(t=89.734,P<0.05).After treatment,the degree of neurological deficit in the observation group(11.01±2.81)points was lower than that of the control group(14.54±3.05)points,and the difference was statistically significant(t=5.107,P<0.05);the observation group's activities of daily living(71.69±8.64)points was higher than that of the control group(50.65±5.58)points,the difference was statistically significant(t=12.274,P<0.05);the complication rate of the observation group(5.56%)was lower than that of the control group(25.00%),and the difference was statistically significant(χ^(2)=5.258,P<0.05);the effective rate of clinical treatment in the observation group was 91.67%,which was higher than 86.11%in the control group,but the difference was not statistically significant(χ^(2)=0.141,P>0.05).Conclusion In the treatment of hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage,both minimally invasive soft channel puncture and drainage and craniotomy hematoma removal have a high clinical treatment rate,but relatively speaking,minimally invasive soft channel puncture and drainage has a better clinical treatment effect.
作者
白金伟
BAI Jinwei(Department of Neurosurgery,Zhangzhou Zhengxing Hospital,Zhangzhou,Fujian Province,363000 China)
出处
《中外医疗》
2021年第32期47-50,共4页
China & Foreign Medical Treatment
关键词
微创软通道穿刺引流术
高血压脑出血
开颅血肿清除术
Minimally invasive soft channel puncture and drainage
Hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage
Craniotomy for hematoma removal
