微创血肿淬吸术与开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的疗效比较

Comparative Study on Efficacy Between Minimally Invasive Hematoma Aspiration and Craniotomy in Treating Hypertensive Cerebral Hemorrhage

目的比较微创血肿淬吸术与开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血的临床疗效差异,探讨两组的临床适用指征。方法将2002年3月至2012年4月在我院住院的363例高血压脑出血患者随机分为微创组与传统组,分别行微创血肿淬吸术及开颅血肿清除术治疗,对比二者疗效。结果微创组并发症发生率明显低于传统组(P<0.01),有效率均显著高于传统组(P<0.05),微创组神经功能缺失评分优于传统组,术后血肿量低于传统组(P<0.01);但当血肿量大于60ml,传统组有效率明显高于微创组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论二者各有优势,应根据具体病情的不同,选择最佳的治疗方法。

Objective To study the effective difference between minimally invasive hematoma aspiration and eraniotomy in treating hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. Methods 363 patients with intraeerebral hemorrhage in our hospital treated by micro-invasive hematoma aspiration and craniotomy were retrospectively analyzed. Results The incidence rate of complications of post-operation in minimally invasive group was lower than that in the traditional group （ P 〈 0. 01 ）, and the total effective rate of minimally invasive group was higher than that of the traditional group （ P 〈 0.05 ）. Meanwhile the rate of efficacy in the traditional group was significantly higher than that of the minimally invasive group when the hematoma volume of the patients was at more than 60ml（ P 〈 0.01 ）. Conclusion Both the minimally invasive hematoma aspiration and craniotomy are of its own advantage, so we should choose the optimal treatment according to the state of illness of the patients.