血管内栓塞和开颅夹闭治疗颅内动脉瘤的临床疗效比较  

Comparison of clinical efficacy between endovascular embolization and craniotomy clipping in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms

作　　者：王振[1] 陈康[1] 杨勇涛[1] 景睿[1] 高永军[1] 曹毅[1] 徐蔚[1] 

机构地区：[1]昆明医科大学第二附属医院神经外科,云南昆明650101

出　　处：《云南医药》2016年第1期22-23,共2页Medicine and Pharmacy of Yunnan

基　　金：云南省科技厅-昆明医科大学联合专项基金项目资助(2012FB007)

摘　　要：目的比较血管内介入栓塞和开颅夹闭治疗颅内动脉瘤的临床疗效。方法选取2013年9月-2015年4月在昆明医科大学第二附属医院诊治的86例颅内动脉瘤患者,随机分为对照组和研究组,每组43例。对照组给予开颅夹闭术治疗,研究组给予介入栓塞治疗,记录并分析两组相关情况。结果治疗后,研究组患者的住院时间较对照组短,但医疗费用大于对照组,格拉斯昏迷评分,视觉模拟评分(VAS)和感染发生率均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组患者动脉瘤破裂、脑积水和血管痉挛与对照组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论血管内介入栓塞和开颅夹闭术治疗颅内动脉瘤各有优势和不足,需依据患者的经济承受能力和意愿选择合理的治疗手段。Objective To compare the clinical effects of endovascular embolization and surgical treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Methods From 2013 September to 2015 April in our Hospital,86 cases of intracranial aneurysm, were randomly assigned to study group or control group（43 cases in each group）. The control group was treated with craniotomy, the study group was treated with interventional embolization, and the correlation of the two groups were recorded and analyzed. Results After treatment, the hospitalization time of the study group was shorter than that of the control group, but the medical cost was higher than that of the control group, and the visual analogue scale（VAS） and the infection rate were lower than those of the control group（P〈0.05）. There was no significant difference of comptication between the study group and the control group（P〉0.05）. Conclusion Endovascular embolization and craniotomy for treatment of intracranial aneurysms each have advantages and disadvantages, it needs to be based on the patient＇s economic capacity and willingness to choose a reasonable treatment.

关 键 词：颅内动脉瘤 血管内介入栓塞 开颅夹闭 治疗结果 

分 类 号：R741[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]