显微手术与血管内栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤的临床疗效比较

Clinical Curative Effect Comparison of Microscopic Surgery and Endovascular Embolization in Treatment With Intracranial Aneurysms

目的比较显微手术与血管内栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤的临床疗效。方法根据手术方式的不同,将98例颅内动脉瘤患者分为两组(每组49例),观察组行显微手术,对照组行血管内栓塞,利用格拉斯哥结果量表(GOS)评价治疗效果对比两组患者的手术疗效,并统计术后不良反应发生情况。结果观察组良好77.55%,中度残疾10.20%,重度残疾6.12%,植物身存2.04%,死亡4.08%;对照组良好73.47%,中度残疾8.16%,重度残疾8.16%,植物身存4.08%,死亡6.12%,两组治疗效果差异比较无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组合并症发生率为12.24%,对照组为16.33%,组间差异比较无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论血管内栓塞和显微手术治疗颅内动脉瘤均有效,二者相互补充、各有利弊,临床手术医师在选择手术方式时,应根据肿瘤大小、部位及患者意愿综合考虑。

Objective Comparing microsurgery and the clinical curative effect of endovascular embolization of intracranial aneurysms. Methods According to the different methods of operation, 98 patients with intracranial aneurysms were divided into two groups（49 cases in each group）, the observation group lines of microsurgery, the control line of endovascular embolization, using Glasgow outcome scale（GOS） to evaluate therapeutic effect comparing the operative efficacy of two groups of patients, and statistics postoperative adverse reactions occur. Results Good observation group 77.55%, moderate disability, 10.20% 6.12% of severe disability, plant body is 2.04%, 4.08% of death; Good control group 73.47%, moderate disability 8.16%, severe disability, 8.16% plant body deposit 4.08%, the death by 6.12%, two groups of treatment effect comparison there was no significant difference in（P〉0.05）. Observation group, the incidence of complications was 12.24%, control group was 16.33%, the group is no significant difference between significance（P〉0.05）. Conclusion Endovascular embolization and microsurgical treatment of intracranial aneurysms are effective, the two complement each other, each have advantages and disadvantages, clinical surgery doctors when choosing operation method, should be based on patients with tumor size, location and the hospital comprehensive consideration.