小骨窗微创血肿清除与大骨瓣开颅血肿清除治疗重症基底节血肿效果比较  

Effect comparison of small bone window minimally invasive hematoma removal and large bone flap craniectomy in the treatment of severe basal ganglia hematoma

作　　者：陈冬颖 

机构地区：[1]佛山市顺德区北滘医院急诊科,广东佛山528300

出　　处：《华夏医学》2017年第6期45-47,共3页Acta Medicinae Sinica

摘　　要：目的:对比小骨窗微创血肿清除与大骨瓣开颅血肿清除治疗重症基底节血肿的效果。方法:选择62例重症基底节血肿患者作为观察对象,按照摸球法分为对照组(n=31,予以大骨瓣开颅血肿清除术)和研究组(n=31,予以小骨窗微创血肿清除术),对两组临床效果进行比较。结果:研究组术前ICH评分、术后血肿残余量与对照组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组病死率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);预后良好率对照组低于研究组,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:与大骨瓣开颅血肿清除术相比,小骨窗微创血肿清除术对重症自发性基底节血肿患者具有微创、恢复速度快、预后良好等优点,值得优先选择。Objective： To compare the effect of minimally invasive hematoma evacuation and large craniotomy hematoma in the treatment of severe basal ganglia hematoma. Methods：62 patients with severe basal ganglia hematoma were enrolled. They were divided into control group （n = 31, large craniotomy） and the study group （ n = 31, to be small bone window minimally invasive hematoma evacuation ） , the difference between the two groups of clinical effects were compared. Resuhs：ICH score before operation and the haematoma remaining quantity after operation in the study group showed non-statistics significance as compared to the control group （P〉0.05）. There was no statistics significance of the fatality rate between the two group （P〉0.05）. The favorable rate of prognosis of control group was lower than that of the study group, with statistical significance （P 〈0. 05 ）. Conclusion： Compared with the large craniotomy and hematoma evacuation, the minimally invasive hematoma evacuation of small bone window has the advantages of minimally invasive, fast recovery and good prognosis in patients with severe spontaneous basal ganglia. It is worthy of preference.

关 键 词：重症基底节血肿 大骨瓣开颅血肿清除 小骨窗微创血肿清除 

分 类 号：R651.15[医药卫生—外科学]