检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:刘福增[1] 殷尚炯[1] 韩树生[1] 王鹏[1] 刘洪泉[1] 关健[2]
机构地区:[1]解放军251医院神经外科,张家口075000 [2]北京协和医院神经外科,100730
出 处:《中国微侵袭神经外科杂志》2015年第10期453-455,共3页Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery
摘 要:目的探讨改良T形切口开颅去骨瓣减压手术治疗重型颅脑损伤的疗效。方法回顾性分析50例重型颅脑损伤病例资料,根据手术方式不同分为T形切口组20例和标准切口组30例,T形切口组采用T形切口开颅减压术治疗,标准切口组采用标准外伤大骨瓣减压术,比较两组的临床疗效。结果两组手术疗效统计学并无显著性差异(P>0.05)。但T形切口在皮瓣血运和颞肌的保护方面有着突出优势(P<0.05)。结论改良T形切口开颅减压术是治疗重型颅脑损伤安全有效的方法,术后并发症少,值得临床推广应用。Objective To discuss the clinical effect of modified T-shaped incision decompressive craniectomy(m TIDC) for severe traumatic brain injury(STBI). Methods The clinical data of 50 STBI patients were analyzed retrospectively. According to the different surgical methods, the patients were divided into T-shaped incision group(n = 20) and standard incision group(n = 30). m TIDC was performed in T-shaped incision group, and the standard large trauma craniectomy in standard incision group. The clinical therapeutic efficacy was compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in surgical outcome between the two groups(P 0.05). A prominent advantage of T-shaped incision was protection of the temporalis muscles and blood circulation in the skin flap(P 0.05). Conclusion m TIDC is safe and effective therapeutic methods for STBI, with less postoperative complications, and worthy of wider clinical application.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.208