颈内动脉-后交通动脉瘤患者临床治疗分析  

Analysis on clinical treatment of patients with internal carotid-posterior communicating artery aneurysm

作　　者：刘文浩 丘琪政[1] 梁明礼[1] 赖湘[1] 张文波[1] 谢锋[1] LIU Wenhao;QIU Qizheng;LIANG Mingli;LAI Xiang;ZHANG Wenbo;XIE Feng(First Department of Neurosurgery,Meizhou People's Hospital,Guangdong Province,Meizhou 514000,China)

机构地区：[1]广东省梅州市人民医院神经外一科,广东梅州514000

出　　处：《中国医药科学》2019年第7期191-193,207,共4页China Medicine And Pharmacy

摘　　要：目的探讨开颅夹闭和介入栓塞治疗颈内动脉-后交通动脉瘤的优缺点。方法回顾性分析我院2015年10月～2017年9月治疗的70例颈内动脉-后交通动脉瘤患者,其中开颅夹闭者32例为手术组,介入栓塞者38例为介入组,进行两组相关资料对比分析。结果两组在手术后致死率比较,差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05);手术组和介入组出院时的恢复情况比较,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05);两组手术后并发症发生情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。结论开颅夹闭和介入栓塞各有各的优缺点,医护人员应该根据个体化的原则选择最佳的治疗方案。Objective To explore advantages and disadvantages of craniotomy clipping and interventional embolization in treatment of internal carotid-posterior communicating artery aneurysm. Methods 70 patients with internal carotid-posterior communicating artery aneurysm who were treated in our hospital from October 2015 to September 2017 were retrospectively analyzed.32 patients underwent craniotomy clipping were set as the surgery group and 38 patients underwent interventional embolization were set as the intervention group. Results Differences in lethality rates after treatment in two groups had no statistical significance(P > 0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in recovery at discharge between the surgery group and the intervention group(P < 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups(P > 0.05).Conclusion Craniotomy clipping and interventional embolization have their own advantages and disadvantages,and medical staff should choose the best therapeutic regimen according to the principle of individualization.

关 键 词：开颅夹闭 介入栓塞 颈内动脉-后交通动脉瘤 预后 

分 类 号：R743[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]