Krause入路和Poppen入路对松果体区显露及损伤程度的解剖学对比研究  

Comparative anatomical study of the exposure extent and injury severity to the pineal region through Krause and Poppen approaches

作　　者：宋思新[1] 潘亚文[1] 许武[1] 段磊[1] 赵贤军[1] 赵志勇[1] 

机构地区：[1]兰州大学第二医院神经外科,730030

出　　处：《中国微侵袭神经外科杂志》2010年第3期131-133,共3页Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery

摘　　要：目的定量比较Krause入路(经幕下小脑上入路)和Poppen入路(枕下经小脑幕入路)对松果体区的显露及损伤情况。方法对6具成年国人头颈部湿性标本,模拟常规Krause入路和Poppen入路的手术操作,每个手术步骤完成后,用Horgan方法计算出显露面积,按Ammirati标准对两种手术入路显露松果体区的程度进行评分比较,同时对两种手术入路的损伤程度进行评分比较。结果Krause入路和Poppen入路的显露程度评分均为2分,显露面积分别为(1298.07±64.67)和(1041.10±50.23)mm2,损伤程度评分分别为(4.5±0.6)和(6.3±0.7)分;两组比较,经t检验,均P<0.01。结论Krause入路和Poppen入路均能达到对松果体区的有效显露,但Krause入路显露面积明显大于后者,且损伤程度更小。Objective To compare the exposure and damage degree to the pineal region between Krause approach （infratentorial supracerebellar approach） and Poppen approach （occipital transtentorium approach）. Methods Six adult Chinese cadaver heads were observed, and the Krause and Poppen approach was simulated in each head. After the operative steps of each approach were completed, the exposure areas were calculated by Horgan method and the exposure extent was assessed between the two surgical approaches according to Ammirati standard. The injury severity from the two approaches was also evaluated and compared. Results The score of the exposure extent in Krause and Poppen approach was 2 in each and the exposure area was 1 298.07±64.67 mm2, 1 041.10±50.23 mm2 respectively. The scores for injury severity in Krause and Poppen approaches were 4.5±0.6 and 6.3±0.7 respectively. T tests showed significant differences （P 0.01） between two groups. Conclusions Both the Krause and Poppen approach can sufficiently expose the pineal region, while the Krause approach can result in a better exposure effects and smaller injury.

关 键 词：解剖学 比较 松果体区 显露程度 损伤程度 

分 类 号：R651[医药卫生—外科学] R322[医药卫生—临床医学]