摘要
目的对比小骨窗血肿清除术和微创血肿穿刺术治疗高血压脑出血的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年6月~2014年6月我院收治的符合标准的74例高血压脑出血患者,随机分成观察组37例和对照组37例,观察组患者使用微创血肿穿刺进行治疗,而对照组使用小骨窗血肿清除术进行治疗。比较两组患者治疗后的疗效以及格拉斯哥（GCS）评分神经功能缺损（CSS）程度评分。结果观察组患者治愈率与总有效率显著性高于对照组（P〈0.05）。观察组术后7d与术后14d的GCS评分和CSS评分均显著性低于对照组（P〈0.05）。结论使用微创血肿穿刺术具有明显的疗效,同时对患者的预后具有较为明显的改善作用,值得在临床上进一步推广使用。
Objective To compare the efficacy of key hole and minimally invasive puncture approach in the treatment of hypertensive cerebral hematoma. Methods 74 patients with hypertensive cerebral hematoma were randomly divided into observed group（37 cases） and control group（37 cases）.Patients in observed group were treated with minimally invasive removal of intracranial hematomas,while others received the treatment of key hole evacuation of hematoma approach.The curative effect,Glasgow coma scale score（GCS） and nerve function defect score（CSS） were compared. Results The cure rate and total effective rate of observed group were significantly higher than that in control group（P〈 0.05）.The GCS score and CSS score of observed group 7d and 14 d after treatment were significantly higher than that in control group（P〈 0.05）. Conclusion Minimally invasive puncture approach has obvious curative effect,and it has a significantly improvement on the prognosis of patients.It is worthy of further study.
出处
《中国医药科学》
2016年第6期146-148,共3页
China Medicine And Pharmacy
关键词
颅内血肿
微创穿刺术
小骨窗血肿清除术
高血压脑出血
Intracranial hematoma
Minimally invasive surgery
Key hole evacuation of hematoma
Hypertensive intra cerebral hemorrhage
