切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华神经创伤外科电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 04 ›› Issue (04) : 217 -221. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2018.04.007

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

传统骨瓣开颅与小骨窗开颅微创治疗高血压脑出血患者的疗效分析
周军1, 岳修臣1, 赵月明1, 孙许林1, 赵鹏1, 刘杰1, 李树志1,(), 李耀华1   
  1. 1. 261500 潍坊,高密市人民医院神经外二科
  • 收稿日期:2018-05-24 出版日期:2018-08-15
  • 通信作者: 李树志

Comparative analysis of small bone window craniotomy and conventional bone flap craniotomy with hypertension cerebral hemorrhage

Jun Zhou1, Xiuchen Yue1, Yueming Zhao1, Xulin Sun1, Peng Zhao1, Jie Liu1, Shuzhi Li1,(), Yaohua Li1   

  1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, The People’s Hospital of Gaomi, Weifang 261500, China
  • Received:2018-05-24 Published:2018-08-15
  • Corresponding author: Shuzhi Li
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Li Shuzhi, Email:
引用本文:

周军, 岳修臣, 赵月明, 孙许林, 赵鹏, 刘杰, 李树志, 李耀华. 传统骨瓣开颅与小骨窗开颅微创治疗高血压脑出血患者的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2018, 04(04): 217-221.

Jun Zhou, Xiuchen Yue, Yueming Zhao, Xulin Sun, Peng Zhao, Jie Liu, Shuzhi Li, Yaohua Li. Comparative analysis of small bone window craniotomy and conventional bone flap craniotomy with hypertension cerebral hemorrhage[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Neurotraumatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2018, 04(04): 217-221.

目的

探讨传统骨瓣开颅与小骨窗微创手术治疗高血压脑出血患者的临床效果并对比分析。

方法

选择高密市人民医院神经外二科自2016年5月至2018年3月收治的高血压脑出血患者72例,根据患者自身病情及家属意见进行手术分组,40例行小骨窗微创开颅(骨窗组),32例行传统骨瓣开颅减压组(骨瓣组)。对比2组患者的术中手术时间、出血量、住院时间及术后6、24、72 h和1周的颅内压值,并于3个月后随访进行日常生活能力(ADL)评分。

结果

骨窗组相对于骨瓣组术中出血量少、手术时间短;2组术后6、24 h颅内压力值比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);骨窗组72 h、1周颅内压力值高于骨瓣组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),但经脱水或释放部分脑脊液后,颅内压值均可控制在正常范围之内。术后3个月按照ADL评分:骨窗组Ⅰ~Ⅲ级良好率85.0%,骨瓣组Ⅰ~Ⅲ级良好率62.50%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

与传统骨瓣开颅术相比,小骨窗微创术医源性创伤小,近期预后好,临床效果显著。

Objective

To explore and compare the clinical efficacy of small bone window craniotomy with conventional bone flap craniotomy in the treatment of patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage.

Methods

Seventy two cases of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage patients treated in the Department of Neurosurgery, Gaomi People’s Hospital from May 2016 to March 2018 were involved in this study. According to random number table method, all of patients were divided into two groups. Forty cases who were performed small bone window craniotomy treatment through lateral fissure approach as bone window group, 32 cases who were performed traditional bone flap craniotomy treatment as bone flap group. Operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion volume, intracranial pressure at 6, 24, 72 h and 1 week after operation were compared between the two groups, and the ADL score was evaluated after 3 months follow-up.

Results

Operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion volume in bone window group were significantly better than the bone flap group.there were no statistical significances on intracranial pressure at 6, 24 h after operation between the two groups, but there was difference at 72 h, 1 week after operation, the intracranial pressure in bone window group was higher than that in the bone flap group. After dehydration or release of part of cerebrospinal fluid, intracranial pressure can be controlled within normal range 33 cases(85.0%) recovered well in observation group, which was better than control group (22 cases, 68.7%), there was statistical difference (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with conventional bone flap craniotomy surgery in the treatment of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage patients, small bone window craniotomy has the characters of evident clinical effect, safe and reliable, and has important clinical value.

表1 2组患者临床资料对比(±s
图1 高血压脑出血患者术前切口及术中骨窗情况
表2 2组患者手术时间、术中出血、住院时间对比(±s
表3 术后颅内压力值比较(mmH2O)
表4 2组患者术后3个月随访日常生活能力分级情况的比较[例(%)]
[1]
游潮,李浩.进一步重视和规范高血压脑出血的外科治疗[J].中华神经外科杂志, 2011, 27(8): 757-758.
[2]
丁昊,游潮,邓琳,等.手术治疗高血压基底核脑出血的预后因素分析(附165例分析)[J].中国微侵袭神经外科杂志, 2007, 12(12): 531-533
[3]
张荣军,王晓峰,唐宗椿,等. 6374例高血压脑出血患者临床特点的分析及治疗方法的选择[J].中华神经医学杂志, 2013, 12(1): 57-61.
[4]
Ramnarayan R,Anto D,Anilkumar TV, et al. Decompressive hemicraniectomy in large putaminal hematomas: an Indian experience[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2009, 18(1): 1-10.
[5]
Fortes Lima TT,Prandini MN,Gallo P, et al. Prognostic value of intraventricular bleeding in spontaneous intraparenchymal cerebral hemorrhage of small volume: a prospective cohort study[J]. Neurosurgery, 2012, 70(4): 929-934; discussion 934-935.
[6]
Fernandez A,Bond RL,Aziz Sultan MA, et al. Cerebral infarction secondary to vasospasm after perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage[J]. J Clin Neurosci, 2011, 18(7): 994-996.
[7]
Martini SR,Flaherty ML,Brown WM, et al. Risk factors for intracerebral hemorrhage differ according to hemorrhage location[J]. Neurology, 2012, 79: 2275-2282.
[8]
Yamada M. Brain hemorrhages in cerebral amyloid angiopathy[J]. Semin Thromb Hemost, 2013, 39(8): 955-962.
[9]
Kaneko M,Tanaka K,Shimada T, et al. Long term evaluation of ultra-early operation for hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage in 100 cases[J]. J Neurosurg, 1983, 58(6): 838-842.
[10]
He QS,Yang LF,Wang WB, et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor gene is associated with hypertensive cerebellar hemorrhage and rehabilitative treatment[J]. Genet Mol Res, 2015, 14(3): 9849-9857.
[11]
周良辅,庞力.高血压脑出血的微侵袭手术治疗-前瞻随机多中心研究[J].中国临床神经科学, 2001, 9(2): 151-154.
[12]
陈晓烨,陈颖,陈东宁,等.颞下窝解剖学结构及毗邻关系[J].局解手术学杂志, 2009, 18(5): 300-303.
[13]
Kaya RA,Türkmenoğlu O,Ziyal IM, et al. The effects of prognosis of surgical treatment of hypertensive putaminal hematomas through transsylvian transinsular approach[J]. SurgNeurol, 2003, 59(3): 176-183; discussion 183.
[14]
Manno EM,Atkinson JL,Fulgham JR, et al. Emerging medical and surgical management strategies in the evaluation and treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Mayo Clin Proc, 2005, 80(3): 420-433.
[15]
赵继宗,周定标,周良辅,等. 2464例高血压脑出血外科治疗多中心单盲研究[J].中华医学杂志, 2005, 85(32): 2238-2242.
[16]
Zuo Y,Cheng G,Gao DK, et al. Gross-total hematoma removal of hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhages: a long-term follow-up[J]. J Neurol Sci, 2009, 287(1-2): 100-104.
[1] 曾晴, 文华轩, 袁鹰, 廖伊梅, 秦越, 罗丹丹, 梁美玲, 李胜利. 经腹二维超声评价胎儿大脑外侧裂的新参数——外侧裂平台角度[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 454-459.
[2] 陈婷, 许承琼, 何绍玲. 依诺肝素治疗高血压脑出血并肺栓塞的疗效和安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(05): 679-681.
[3] 王永楠, 汤畅通, 殷杰, 谭溢涛. 微创钻孔引流术与神经内镜血肿清除术治疗临界量基底节脑出血的效果对比分析[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 286-292.
[4] 张志超, 李陈, 韩惠, 周夏, 洪家康. 经额平行白质纤维束立体定向血肿穿刺引流术与神经内镜下血肿清除术治疗基底节脑出血的临床对比分析[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 299-303.
[5] 苗楠, 宗子钰. 脑出血后继发性脑损伤与线粒体相关机制的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(02): 107-111.
[6] 张华军, 齐文涛, 朱飞, 段晓春. 原发性脑干出血外科手术干预的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2023, 09(06): 372-377.
[7] 肖增丽, 杜安琪, 孙瑶, 赵慧颖, 安友仲. 脑出血术后AKI发生的危险因素分析及预测模型建立[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2024, 10(02): 157-163.
[8] 刘国龙, 王鹏, 谭超, 杨辉, 彭菊红. 神经外科机器人辅助双通道颅内血肿清除术治疗高血压性脑出血[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(04): 254-256.
[9] 景方坤, 周建波, 王全才, 黄海韬, 李岩峰, 徐杨熙. 神经导航引导下治疗基底节高血压脑出血的短期疗效预测[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(03): 154-159.
[10] 鲁悦, 李伟, 庄宗, 王娟, 赵鹏来, 杭春华. 脑出血继发吉兰-巴雷综合征二例报道并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(02): 120-123.
[11] 董西朝, 王林林, 袁致海, 高文文. 超早期经脑沟裂入路与经脑回皮质入路显微手术治疗基底节区脑出血的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(02): 100-105.
[12] 王栋梁, 宋海栋, 焦风, 伍刚, 仁增, 吴文博, 吴科学, 曹旭东, 翁宇. 西藏地区神经内镜辅助手术治疗基底节区脑出血的临床初步研究[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(10): 1075-1079.
[13] 穆巴拉克·伊力哈, 徐霁华, 鲁明. 急性轻型卒中微量脑出血误诊病例的临床特点及影像学表现分析[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 441-445.
[14] 邓仙裕, 罗钰璇, 张溱乐, 余展鹏, 彭亮. 自发性脑出血重症患者30 d死亡风险预测模型的建立及验证[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 121-128.
[15] 王永彬, 贾彦迅, 尹轶广. 神经导航结合3D重建技术引导神经内镜血肿清除术对高血压脑出血患者的影响[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 153-156.
阅读次数
全文


摘要