显微镜下血肿清除术与常规开颅术治疗高血压基底节区脑出血的效果比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (15)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (35 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To study the effect of microscopic hematoma removal and conventional craniotomy for the treatment of hypertension basal ganglia cerebral hemorrhage.Methods A total of 40 patients with basal ganglia cerebral hemorrhage who were treated in our hospital between January 1,2016 and December 31,2017 were selected as subjects.The patients were divided into 2 groups by odd-even grouping.Each group consisted of 20 patients.The patients in the control group received routine craniotomy.The patients in the experimental group underwent microsurgical hematoma removal.The surgical indexes,the incidence of complications,and the ability of daily living after treatment were compared between the two groups.Results The average surgical time and postoperative hospital stay in the experimental group were shorter than those in the control group,the intraoperative blood loss in the experimental group was less than that in the control group,the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).The incidence of the disease was 10.00%(2/20),which was lower than the incidence of the control group(40.00%),and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The daily living ability of the experimental group was significantly higher than that of the control group,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion The treatment of hypertensive basal ganglia cerebral hemorrhage by microscopic hematoma removal has less trauma to the patient and can reduce the risk of complications.It is worthy of popularization and application.

Key words： Microscopic hematoma removal Conventional craniotomy Hypertension Basaloid region cerebral hemorrhage

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	ZHAN Hao-qiang
	LI Shao-peng
	CHAI Hui-hui

Cite this article:

ZHAN Hao-qiang,LI Shao-peng,CHAI Hui-hui. Effect comparison of hematoma removal and conventional craniotomy for intracerebral hemorrhage in hypertensive basal ganglia[J]. 中国当代医药, 2018, 25(28): 79-81.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2018/V25/I28/79

[1]	葛新，陈晓雷，孙吉庆，等.神经内镜微创手术与开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血疗效比较[J].中国神经精神疾病杂志，2016，42（10）：605-608.
[2]	彭逸龙，伍益，陈少霭，等.神经内镜与传统开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的疗效比较[J].中国微侵袭神经外科杂志，2016，21（5）：217-218.
[3]	罗俊杰，戴永建，吕伟，等.开颅手术与神经内镜治疗高血压脑出血的疗效比较[J].广西医科大学学报，2016，33（1）：135-137.
[4]	杨与敏，刘之彝，龙晓东，等.神经内镜手术与常规开颅手术治疗高血压脑出血疗效的回顾性分析[J].四川医学，2017，38（8）：913-916.
[5]	杨彦龙，常涛，高立，等.神经内镜辅助与枕下开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压小脑出血疗效比较[J].中国神经精神疾病杂志，2017，43（8）：453-457.
[6]	李十全，伍铭，容水生，等.80例显微镜下颅内血肿清除术治疗高血压性脑出血疗效分析[J].齐齐哈尔医学院学报，2016，37（27）：3403-3404.
[7]	印晓鸿，王远传，唐晓平，等.神经内镜与显微镜在高血压脑内血肿手术治疗中的对比研究[J].重庆医学，2016，45（26）：3697-3699.
[8]	叶富跃，杨堃，郑传宜，等.颅内微创血肿清除术与传统开颅清除血肿手术在高血压脑出血中的应用效果分析[J].河北医学，2016，22（1）：17-20.
[9]	韩繁龙，张国来，吴生贵，等.小骨窗与大骨瓣开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的疗效分析[J].现代生物医学进展，2016，16（33）：6542-6545.
[10]	赵云栋，候海宇，赵明宇.小骨窗开颅血肿清除术和大骨瓣开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的临床效果分析[J].中国医药指南，2016，14（8）：5-6.
[11]	曾令洲，许安荣，李玉斌，等.小骨窗开颅血肿清除术与传统大骨瓣开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的疗效比较[J].神经损伤与功能重建，2016，11（5）：436-438.
[12]	王常伟，刘德中，李楷，等.高血压脑出血患者显微镜下行小骨窗血肿清除术的临床有效性探讨[J].中国实用医药，2016，11（21）：55-56.
[13]	刘万荣，魏忠，方有利，等.传统骨瓣开颅血肿清除术与小骨窗入路血肿清除术治疗基底节区高血压脑出血的临床疗效对比观察[J].安徽医药，2017，21（10）：1844-1846.
[14]	陈建勇.小骨窗开颅血肿清除术与大骨瓣开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的疗效比较[J].中国实用医药，2016，11（17）：132-133.
[15]	单伟.微创穿刺术及小骨窗开颅术治疗高血压脑出血的疗效分析[J].中国现代药物应用，2016，10（2）：97-98.