首页|常规开颅对比钻孔引流对基底节区脑出血患者神经功能缺损及预后的影响

常规开颅对比钻孔引流对基底节区脑出血患者神经功能缺损及预后的影响

扫码查看
目的 对比常规开颅与钻孔引流对基底节区脑出血(HBGH)患者神经功能缺损及预后的影响.方法 以2019年2月-2022年2月大余县人民医院收治的58例HBGH患者为研究对象,经随机数字表法分为开颅组(29例)与钻孔组(29例),开颅组行常规开颅血肿清除术治疗,钻孔组则采用钻孔引流术治疗,比较两组手术相关指标(手术时间、血肿清除率、术后住院时间)、术后再出血及并发症情况、神经功能缺损程度、预后情况[格拉斯预后评分(GOS)、改良Barthe1指数(MBI)].结果 两组血肿清除率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但钻孔组手术时间、术后住院时间短于开颅组(P<0.05).两组术后再出血率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但钻孔组并发症发生率低于开颅组(P<0.05).术后6个月,两组神经功能缺损程度比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组GOS评分对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但钻孔组MBI评分高于开颅组(P<0.05).结论 常规开颅与钻孔引流在HBGH治疗中均具有确切作用,二者血肿清除效果相当,预后一致,但后者手术时间更短、术后恢复更快、并发症风险更低,更有利于患者神经功能与预后的改善.
Effects of Conventional Craniotomy and Drilling Drainage on Neurological Deficits and Prognosis in Patients with Hypertensive Basal Ganglia Hemorrhage
Objective To compare the effects of conventional craniotomy and drilling drainage on neurological deficits and prognosis in patients with hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhage(HBGH).Methods A total of 58 patients with HBGH admitted to Dayu County People's Hospital from February 2019 to February 2022 were enrolled in the study.They were divided into craniotomy group(29 patients)and drilling group(29 patients)by random number table method.The craniotomy group was treated with conventional craniotomy hematoma removal,while the drilling group was treated with drilling drainage.The operation-related indicators(operation time,hematoma clearance rate,postoperative hospital stay),postoperative rebleeding and complications,degree of neurological deficits,and prognosis[Glass prognostic score(GOS),modified Barthel index(MBI)]were compared between the two groups.Results There was no significant difference in hematoma clearance rate between the two groups(P>0.05),but the operation time and postoperative hospital stay in the drilling group were shorter than those in the craniotomy group(P<0.05),but the incidence of complications in the drilling group was lower than that in the craniotomy group(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in postoperative rebleeding rate between the two groups(P>0.05),but the incidence of complications in the drilling group was lower than that in the craniotomy group(P<0.05).At 6 months after operation,there was significant difference in the degree of neurological deficit between the two groups(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in GOS score between the two groups(P>0.05),but the MBI score of the drilling group was higher than that of the craniotomy group(P<0.05).Conclusion Conventional craniotomy and drilling drainage have definite effects in the treatment of HBGH.The hematoma removal effect of the two is similar and the prognosis is consistent.However,the latter has shorter operation time,faster postoperative recovery and lower risk of complications,which is more conducive to the improvement of neurological function and prognosis of patients.

Hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhageCraniotomy hematoma removalDrilling drainageNeurological function

廖林生

展开 >

大余县人民医院神经外科,江西 大余 341500

基底节区脑出血 开颅血肿清除术 钻孔引流术 神经功能

2024

医学信息
国家卫生部信息化管理领导小组 中国电子学会中国医药信息学分会 陕西文博生物信息工程研究所

医学信息

影响因子:0.161
ISSN:1006-1959
年,卷(期):2024.37(6)
  • 25