微创血肿穿刺术和传统开颅清除术治疗老年脑出血的优劣分析

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (15)
Related Citation (14)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (36 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract ObjectiveTo explore and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of minimally invasive hematoma puncture and traditional craniotomy in the treatment of senile cerebral hemorrhage.MethodsFrom June 2011 to March 2016,124 senile patients with cerebral hemorrhage treated in our hospital were selected as research objects.According to a random number table,they were evenly divided into the observation group and the control group,62 cases in each group.In the observation group，minimally invasive hematoma puncture for the treatment was selected,while in the control group,traditional craniotomy was applied.The related clinical indicators including intraoperative amount of bleeding, operationtime,intracerebral hematoma clearance,ICU time after surgery,the score of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale(NIHSS),GOS score,and the score of SF－36 living quality questionnaire were observed and recorded.ResultsThe indicators of intraoperative amount of bleeding,operationtime,ICU time after surgery,hematomaclearance,and SF－36 score in the observation group were all superior to those in the control group with statistical differences(P＜0.05).The NIHSS score and GOS score evaluating good rate and mortality in the observation group were better than those in the control group with statistical differences(P＜0.05).ConclusionCompared with the traditional craniotomy,application of minimally invasive hematoma puncture in the treatment of senile cerebral hemorrhage can obtain a remarkable effect and effectively increase the hematoma clearance at advantages of reducing intraoperative amount of bleeding,shortening operation time，and decreasing patient′s mortality,which can be promoted in clinical practice.

Key words： Minimally invasive hematoma puncture Traditionalcraniotomy Erebral hemorrhage

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LI Huan-liang
	HOU Xiao-bin

Cite this article:

LI Huan-liang,HOU Xiao-bin. Analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of minimally invasive hematoma puncture and traditional craniotomy in the treatment of senile cerebral hemorrhage[J]. 中国当代医药, 2017, 24(31): 55-57.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2017/V24/I31/55

[1]	姚柱炜，蒙剑锋，栾宏权.微创血肿穿刺术与传统开颅清除术治疗老年脑出血患者的临床疗效分析[J].中华临床医师杂志（电子版），2016，10（10）：1395－1398.
[2]	贾增强，范得普，曾现伟.不同术式治疗高血压基底节区脑出血的临床疗效分析[J].现代医药卫生，2013，29（8）：1126－1128.
[3]	张操魁，胡丹，郭卫锋.高血压脑出血显微镜下开颅血肿清除术与微创锥颅血肿碎吸引流术治疗效果对比分析[J].中外医学研究，2013，11（13）：134－135.
[4]	孙凌云，张小强，王湘，等.高血压脑出血治疗中应用超早期小骨窗微创颅内血肿清除术的疗效分析[J].河北医学，2017，23（3）：424－427.
[5]	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.
[6]	尹常春，王顺帆.脑出血微创手术联合置管吸引手术治疗老年脑出血临床疗效[J].齐齐哈尔医学院学报，2017，38（5）：574－575.
[7]	江辉，赵京涛，曾群.微创穿刺术和传统开颅术治疗高血压基底节区脑出血的对比研究[J]，中国医药导报，2012，9（16）：68－70.
[8]	单伟.微创穿刺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.
[9]	王庆亮，杨郁野，丁俊连，等.微创穿刺术治疗高血压基底节区脑出血的临床价值分析 [J].中国医药科学，2013，3（20）：195－204.
[10]	肖庆华.微创颅内血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的临床疗效研究[J].当代医学，2016，22（24）：83－84.
[11]	龚敏.微创血肿穿刺术与传统开颅清除术治疗老年脑出血的临床效果对比[J].基层医学论坛，2017，21（7）：836－837.
[12]	马爱金，郝冬琳，许元丰.微创治疗高血压脑出血的疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志，2011，14（22）：70－71.
[13]	程孟忠，李康成，吉康荣.微创钻孔引流术治疗高血压脑出血[J].临床医学，2017，37（2）：48－50.
[14]	张晓峰，零达尚，张建国，等.小骨窗开颅血肿清除术与穿刺外引流术治疗高血压基底节区脑出血的疗效比较[J].中国医药导报，2012，9（16）：77－80.
[15]	谢海峰，彭文益，马何，等.小骨窗开颅与传统手术治疗高血压脑出血的临床分析[J].重庆医学，2015，44（36）：5101－5106.