小骨窗开颅术和钻孔引流术治疗脑出血疗效的临床疗效对比  

Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Small Bone Window Craniotomy and Drilling Drainage in the Treatment of Cerebral Hemorrhage

作　　者：陈轩[1] 姚宏伟[1] 李冰[1] 李齐印 Chen Xuan;Yao Hongwei;Li Bing;Li Qiyin(Department of Neurosurgery,Shangqiu No.1 People's Hospital,Shangqiu 476100)

机构地区：[1]商丘市第一人民医院神经外科,商丘476100

出　　处：《数理医药学杂志》2021年第5期670-671,共2页Journal of Mathematical Medicine

摘　　要：目的:探究小骨窗开颅术和钻孔引流术治疗脑出血疗效。方法:回顾性分析某院2019年1月~2020年1月收治的80例脑出血患者的临床资料,根据患者手术方式分为开颅手术组(58例)和钻孔引流组(22例),比较两组患者术后血肿减少情况及预后指标。结果:开颅手术组血肿清除率明显高于钻孔引流组(P<0.05);两组患者住院时间、并发症发作情况、GOS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但开颅手术组手术费用高于钻孔引流组(P<0.05)。结论:小骨窗开颅术及钻孔引流术均为临床上治疗脑出血的常用术式,可根据患者实际情况进行选择。Objective:To explore the effect of small bone window craniotomy and drilling drainage in the treatment of cerebral hemorrhage.Methods:The clinical data of 80 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage treated in a hospital from January 2019 to January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed.According to the surgical methods,the patients were divided into craniotomy group(58 cases)and drilling drainage group(22 cases).The reduction of hematoma and prognostic indicators were compared between the two groups.Results:The hematoma clearance rate in craniotomy group was significantly higher than that in drilling drainage group(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in hospitalization time,complications and GOS score between the two groups(P>0.05).However,the operation cost of craniotomy group was higher than that of drilling drainage group(P<0.05).Conclusion:Small bone window craniotomy and drilling drainage are commonly used in the treatment of cerebral hemorrhage,which can be selected according to the actual situation of patients.

关 键 词：小骨窗开颅术 钻孔引流术 脑出血 疗效 

分 类 号：R651[医药卫生—外科学]