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 ›› 2020, Vol. 06 ›› Issue (05) : 259 -264. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2020.05.002

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

破裂前交通动脉瘤术后患者认知功能及预后的临床研究
王士洲1, 徐新娟1, 王策1, 王科科1, 黄忻涛1, 马宁1,(), 刘爱华2   
  1. 1. 030000 太原,山西医科大学第一医院神经外科
    2. 100050 北京,首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院神经外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-06-05 出版日期:2020-10-15
  • 通信作者: 马宁
  • 基金资助:
    山西省卫生和计划生育委员会研究基金(2015023); 山西青年科学家自然科学基金(201601D202097); 山西省高等学校教育科技创新项目(2018020064); 重点研究和开发项目(201803D31112); 山西医科大学第一医院研究基金(YB161709); 十二五国家科技支撑计划合作课题(2011BA108B06)

Clinical study on cognitive function and prognosis of patients with ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysm after operation

Shizhou Wang1, Xinjuan Xu1, Ce Wang1, Keke Wang1, Xintao Huang1, Ning Ma1,(), Aihua Liu2   

  1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, The First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030000, China
    2. Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China
  • Received:2020-06-05 Published:2020-10-15
  • Corresponding author: Ning Ma
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Ma Ning, Email:
引用本文:

王士洲, 徐新娟, 王策, 王科科, 黄忻涛, 马宁, 刘爱华. 破裂前交通动脉瘤术后患者认知功能及预后的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2020, 06(05): 259-264.

Shizhou Wang, Xinjuan Xu, Ce Wang, Keke Wang, Xintao Huang, Ning Ma, Aihua Liu. Clinical study on cognitive function and prognosis of patients with ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysm after operation[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Neurotraumatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2020, 06(05): 259-264.

目的

研究破裂前交通动脉瘤手术治疗后患者的认知功能及预后情况。

方法

回顾性分析山西医科大学第一医院神经外科自2015年3月至2017年6月连续收治的94例破裂前交通动脉瘤患者的临床资料,应用认知功能电话问卷修订版及工具性日常生活能力量表、改良Rankin量表评价术后患者的认知功能及预后。采用单因素分析及多因素Logistic回归分析术后患者认知功能与预后的影响因素。

结果

67例患者完成了术后认知功能及预后的随访评价。单因素分析:Hunt-Hess分级、文化程度是术后患者认知功能的影响因素(P<0.05);Hunt-Hess分级、Fisher分级、年龄、文化程度是患者预后的影响因素(P<0.05)。进一步行多因素分析,高文化程度是术后患者认知功能的独立影响因素(OR=0.073,95%CI:0.008~0.638,P=0.018)。

结论

高文化程度是术后患者认知功能的独立影响因素,且是保护因素。

Objective

To investigate the cognitive function and prognosis of patients with ruptured anterior communicating aneurysm after surgical treatment.

Methods

Retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 94 consecutive patients with ruptured anterior communicating aneurysm admitted to Neurosurgery Department of The First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University from March 2015 to June 2017. The cognitive function and prognosis of postoperative patients were evaluated by means of telephone interview for cognitive status-modified, instrumental daily living ability scale and modified Rankin scale. Univariate analysis and multifactorial Logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative patients’cognitive function and prognosis.

Results

Follow-up evaluation of postoperative cognitive function and prognosis was completed in 67 patients. Univariate analysis: Hunt-Hess grade and degree of education were influential factors for postoperative cognitive function in patients (P<0.05). Hunt-Hess grade, Fisher grade, age and degree of education were influential factors for prognosis of the patients (P<0.05). Further multi-factor Logistic analysis showed that high education level was an independent factor affecting postoperative cognitive function of patients (OR=0.073, 95%CI: 0.008-0.638, P=0.018).

Conclusion

High educational level is an independent and protective factor of postoperative cognitive function.

表1 破裂前交通动脉瘤患者术后认知功能及预后的单因素分析
项目 TICS-m评分 IADL评分 mRs评分
≥33分 <33分 Z/χ2 P ≥5分 <5分 Z/χ2 P ≤2分 >2分 Z/χ2 P
开颅与介入[例(%)] ? ? 0.322 0.570 ? ? 2.504 0.114 ? ? 7.013 0.008
? 开颅夹闭 14(73.7) 36(75.0) ? ? 47(78.3) 3(42.9) ? ? 47(81.0) 3(33.3) ? ?
? 介入栓塞 6(26.3) 11(25.0) ? ? 13(21.7) 4(57.1) ? ? 11(19.0) 6(66.7) ? ?
开颅侧别[例(%)] ? ? 1.654 0.198 ? ? 0.518 0.412 ? ? 0.518 0.412
? 左侧 7(50.0) 25(69.4) ? ? 29(61.7) 3(100) ? ? 29(61.7) 3(100) ? ?
? 右侧 7(50.0) 11(30.6) ? ? 18(38.3) 0(0) ? ? 18(38.3) 0(0) ? ?
切除直回[例(%)] ? ? 0.000 1.000 ? ? 0.000 1.000 ? ? 0.000 1.000
? 切除 9(64.3) 16(44.4) ? ? 23(48.9) 2(66.7) ? ? 23(48.9) 2(66.7) ? ?
? 未切除 5(35.7) 20(55.6) ? ? 24(51.1) 1(33.3) ? ? 24(51.1) 1(33.3) ? ?
使用支架[例(%)] ? ? - 0.280 ? ? - 1.000 ? ? - 1.000
? 支架辅助 3(60.0) 3(25.0) ? ? 5(38.5) 1(25.0) ? ? 4(36.4) 2(33.3) ? ?
? 无支架辅助 2(40.0) 9(75.0) ? ? 8(61.5) 3(75.0) ? ? 7(63.6) 4(66.7) ? ?
性别(男/女) 11/8 29/19 1.618 0.203 32/26 8/1 1.869 0.172 32/26 8/1 1.869 0.172
年龄[岁,M(IQR)] 49.5(14.0) 50(14.0) -0.288 0.773 49.5(15.0) 56(11.0) -2.257 0.024 49.5(14.0) 56(12.0) -2.190 0.029
动脉瘤最长径[岁,M(IQR)] 4(1.4) 3.8(3.5) -0.558 0.577 4(2.5) 4(4) -0.524 0.600 4(2.8) 3.4(2.8) -0.037 0.971
Hunt-Hess分级[例(%)] ? ? 8.924 0.012 ? ? 10.291 0.006 ? ? 9.538 0.008
? Ⅰ级 5(25.0) 19(40.4) ? ? 22(36.7) 2(28.6) ? ? 22(37.9) 2(22.2) ? ?
? Ⅱ级 11(55.0) 18(38.3) ? ? 27(45.0) 1(14.3) ? ? 26(44.8) 2(22.2) ? ?
? Ⅲ级 4(20.0) 10(21.3) ? ? 11(18.3) 4(57.1) ? ? 10(17.3) 5(55.6) ? ?
Fisher分级[例(%)] ? ? 5.070 0.079 ? ? 10.774 0.005 ? ? 3.708 0.157
? 2 13(65.0) 31(66.0) ? ? 41(68.3) 3(42.9) ? ? 39(67.2) 5(55.6) ? ?
? 3 5(25.0) 9(19.1) ? ? 14(23.3) 0(0.0) ? ? 14(24.1) 0(0.0) ? ?
? 4 2(10.0) 7(14.9) ? ? 5(83.4) 4(57.1) ? ? 5(8.6) 4(44.4) ? ?
高血压[例(%)] 8(42.1) 20(41.7) 0.001 0.974 23(39.7) 5(55.6) 0.228 0.592 23(39.7) 5(55.6) 0.228 0.592
饮酒[例(%)] 7(36.8) 16(32.0) 0.074 0.785 22(36.7) 1(14.3) 0.577 0.448 21(36.2) 2(22.2) 0.198 0.656
吸烟[例(%)] 9(47.4) 18(37.5) 0.551 0.458 25(42.7) 2(28.6) 0.068 0.794 24(41.4) 3(33.3) 0.009 0.926
动脉瘤分型[例(%)] ? ? 0.237 0.626 ? ? 0.852 0.356 ? ? 1.133 0.287
? 上凸型 14(70.0) 30(63.8) ? ? 41(68.3) 3(42.9) ? ? 40(69.0) 4(44.4) ? ?
? 下凸型 6(30.0) 17(36.2) ? ? 19(31.7) 4(57.1) ? ? 18(31.0) 5(55.6) ? ?
术后脑挫伤[例(%)] ? ? 0.612 0.434 ? ? - 1.000 ? ? - 1.000
? 无挫伤 20(100.0) 43(91.5) ? ? 56(93.3) 7(100.0) ? ? 54(93.1) 9(100.0) ? ?
? 有挫伤 0(0.0) 4(8.5) ? ? 4(6.7) 0(0.0) ? ? 4(6.9) 0(0.0) ? ?
术后脑梗死[例(%)] ? ? 0.870 0.768 ? ? 0.455 0.500 ? ? 0.000 1.000
? 9(45.0) 23(48.9) ? ? 30(50.0) 2(28.6) ? ? 28(48.3) 4(44.4) ? ?
? 11(55.0) 24(51.1) ? ? 30(50.0) 5(71.4) ? ? 30(51.7) 5(55.6) ? ?
术后脑积水[例(%)] ? ? 0.000 1.000 ? ? - 0.556 ? ? - 1.000
? 18(90.0) 42(89.4) ? ? 54(90.0) 6(85.7) ? ? 52(89.7) 8(88.9) ? ?
? 2(10.0) 5(10.6) ? ? 6(10.0) 1(14.3) ? ? 6(10.3) 1(11.1) ? ?
文化程度[例(%)] ? ? 11.456 0.003 ? ? 7.020 0.030 ? ? 6.692 0.035
? 小学 2(10.0) 17(36.2) ? ? 14(23.3) 5(71.4) ? ? 13(22.4) 6(66.7) ? ?
? 中学 13(65.0) 27(57.4) ? ? 38(63.3) 2(28.6) ? ? 37(63.8) 3(33.3) ? ?
? 大学及以上 5(25.0) 3(6.4) ? ? 8(13.3) 0(0.0) ? ? 8(17.8) 0(0.0) ? ?
表2 67例前交通患者认知功能及预后影响因素的多因素Logistic回归分析结果
[1]
Jagadeesan BD, Delgado Almandoz JE, Kadkhodayan Y, et al. Size and anatomic location of ruptured intracranial aneurysms in patients with single and multiple aneurysms: a retrospective study from a single center[J]. J Neurointerv Surg, 2014, 6(3): 169-174.
[2]
万大海,杨钰桢,马宁.影响经翼点入路夹闭破裂前交通动脉动脉瘤预后的临床因素分析[J].中华神经外科杂志, 2019, 35(7): 708-711.
[3]
耿建国,张玉勇.前交通动脉瘤不同手术治疗的疗效及对患者认知功能的影响[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志, 2015, 18(24): 81-82.
[4]
Frazer D, Ahuja A, Watkins L, et al. Coiling versus clipping for the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a longitudinal investigation into cognitive outcome[J]. Neurosurgery, 2007, 60(3): 434-441; discussion 441-432.
[5]
Santiago-Ramajo S, Katati MJ, Perez-Garcia M, et al. Neuropsychological evaluation of the treatments applied to intracranial aneurysms in a Spanish sample[J]. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol, 2007, 29(6): 634-641.
[6]
Nassiri F, Workewych AM, Badhiwala JH, et al. Cognitive outcomes after anterior communicating artery aneurysm repair[J]. Can J Neurol Sci, 2018, 45(4): 415-423.
[7]
Al-Khindi T, Macdonald RL, Schweizer TA. Cognitive and functional outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J]. Stroke, 2010, 41(8): e519-e536.
[8]
Zanaty M, Nakagawa D, Starke RM, et al. Intraventricular extension of an aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage is an independent predictor of a worse functional outcome[J]. Clin Neurol Neurosurg, 2018, 170: 67-72.
[9]
Reijmer YD, van den Heerik MS, Heinen R, et al. Microstructural white matter abnormalities and cognitive impairment after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J]. Stroke, 2018, 49(9): 2040-2045.
[10]
Lucke-Wold BP, Logsdon AF, Manoranjan B, et al. Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and neuroinflammation: a comprehensive review[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2016, 17(4): 497.
[11]
Pinto TCC, Machado L, Bulgacov TM, et al. Influence of age and education on the performance of elderly in the brazilian version of the montreal cognitive assessment battery[J]. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord, 2018, 45(5-6): 290-299.
[12]
Guerra-Carrillo B, Katovich K, Bunge SA. Does higher education hone cognitive functioning and learning efficacy? Findings from a large and diverse sample[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(8): e0182276.
[13]
Kotekar N, Shenkar A, Nagaraj R. Postoperative cognitive dysfunction-current preventive strategies[J]. Clin Interv Aging, 2018, 13: 2267-2273.
[14]
O’Neill AH, Chandra RV, Lai LT. Safety and effectiveness of microsurgical clipping, endovascular coiling, and stent assisted coiling for unruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms: a systematic analysis of observational studies[J]. J Neurointerv Surg, 2017, 9(8): 761-765.
[15]
Heit JJ, Ball RL, Telischak NA, et al. Patient outcomes and cerebral infarction after ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysm treatment[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2017, 38(11): 2119-2125.
[16]
Mortimer AM, Steinfort B, Faulder K, et al. Rates of local procedural-related structural injury following clipping or coiling of anterior communicating artery aneurysms[J]. J Neurointerv Surg, 2016, 8(3): 256-264.
[17]
Deutsch BC, Neifert SN, Caridi JM. No disparity in outcomes between surgical clipping and endovascular coiling after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J]. World Neurosurg, 2018, 120: e318-e325.
[18]
Lindgren A, Turner EB, Sillekens T, et al. Outcome after clipping and coiling for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in clinical practice in Europe, USA, and Australia[J]. Neurosurgery, 2019, 84(5): 1019-1027.
[19]
Mahaney KB, Brown RD, Jr, Meissner I, et al. Age-related differences in unruptured intracranial aneurysms: 1-year outcomes[J]. J Neurosurg, 2014, 121(5): 1024-1038.
[20]
王栋,鹿海龙,王心刚,等.影响介入栓塞与开颅瘤颈夹闭术治疗颅内动脉瘤患者预后的危险因素分析[J].神经损伤与功能重建, 2020, 15(1): 39-41.
[21]
Veldeman M, Hollig A, Clusmann H, et al. Delayed cerebral ischaemia prevention and treatment after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage: a systematic review[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2016, 117(1): 17-40.
[22]
Fujii M, Yan J, Rolland WB, et al. Early brain injury, an evolving frontier in subarachnoid hemorrhage research[J]. Transl Stroke Res, 2013, 4(4): 432-446.
[23]
Witsch J, Frey HP, Patel S, et al. Prognostication of long-term outcomes after subarachnoid hemorrhage: the FRESH score[J]. Ann Neurol, 2016, 80(1): 46-58.
[24]
邱方方,陆远强.影响动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血的预后因素分析[J].中华急诊医学杂志, 2019, 28(3): 379-383.
[25]
Froehner M, Koch R, Propping S, et al. Level of education and mortality after radical prostatectomy[J]. Asian J Androl, 2017, 19(2): 173-177.
[26]
Puigpinós R, Borrell C, Antunes JLF, et al. Trends in socioeconomic inequalities in cancer mortality in Barcelona: 1992-2003[J]. BMC Public Health, 2009, 9(1): 35.
[27]
Abdoli G, Bottai M, Moradi T. Cancer mortality by country of birth, sex, and socioeconomic position in Sweden, 1961-2009[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(3): e93174.
[28]
吕志红,刘晓加.认知功能电话问卷修订版在缺血性脑卒中后认知功能研究中的应用[J].中华神经医学杂志, 2016, 15(6): 604-609.
[29]
Lacruz ME, Bickel H, Emeny RT, et al. Feasibility, internal consistency and covariates of TICS-m (telephone interview for cognitive status-modified) in a population-based sample: findings from the KORA-age study[J]. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2013, 28(9): 971-978.
[30]
Bentvelzen AC, Crawford JD, Theobald A, et al. Validation and normative data for the modified telephone interview for cognitive status: the sydney memory and ageing study[J]. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2019, 67(10): 2108-2115.
[31]
孟超,张新卿,周景升,等.认知功能电话问卷修订版(TICS-m)在痴呆测查中的应用[J].中国心理卫生杂志, 2005, 19(1): 34-37.
[1] 陆婷, 范晴敏, 王洁, 万晓静, 许春芳, 董凤林. 超声引导下经皮穿刺置管引流对重症急性胰腺炎的疗效及应用时机的选择[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 511-516.
[2] 邢颖, 程石. 巨脾外科治疗现状与介入治疗序贯手术策略[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(03): 253-258.
[3] 冯铭, 孙洪涛. 动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血的颅内压监测与管理[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 248-253.
[4] 李晓东, 李昂, 马龙, 刘亮, 魏云, 王汉宇. 基底动脉顶端动脉瘤显微手术治疗[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 254-256.
[5] 唐必英, 李钢. 治疗时机对动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血患者预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 213-219.
[6] 杨金朔, 吴桥伟, 王春雷, 史怀璋. 脑血管内支架成形术后再狭窄的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(03): 174-179.
[7] 李晓东, 王汉宇, 马龙, 刘亮, 魏云, 李昂. 小脑后下动脉瘤的显微手术治疗[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 318-320.
[8] 吉莉, 苏云楠, 王斌, 沈滔, 刘团结, 毛蕾, 徐玉萍, 张婷, 王博. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者脑白质微结构改变对长期认知功能损伤的预测价值研究[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(04): 193-200.
[9] 牟超鹏, 宗斌, 刘奕, 史美英, 徐杜娟, 冯春光. 经远端桡动脉与经常规桡动脉行急诊冠脉介入诊疗后穿刺部位血肿的对比[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 275-282.
[10] 高倩, 李晓芳, 杨亚昭, 张静, 崔蕾, 杨立青, 夏艳敏. 甲状腺激素及Apelin在CSVD致认知障碍的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 201-206.
[11] 陈芳, 王建英, 曹建用, 刘丽, 罗晓琴. 基于分析-设计-开发-实施-评价模式的叙事护理培训在产科预防性介入治疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 392-396.
[12] 李超迪, 刘娟芳, 闫肃, 秦胜东, 张镐哲, 常琼方, 韩新巍, 张建好. 血管性介入治疗在宫颈癌大出血患者中的临床疗效[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 217-220.
[13] 周宝林, 刘曦, 谌浩, 王金, 马雪琴. 温敏水凝胶在血管内栓塞治疗中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 244-249.
[14] 周洪千, 张煜坤, 顾天舒, 胡苏涛, 姜超, 张雪, 张昊, 陶华岳, 刘行, 刘彤, 陈康寅. 既往出血性脑卒中患者行经皮冠脉介入治疗后不良事件的危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 323-329.
[15] 欧春影, 李晓宾, 郭靖, 许可, 王梦, 安晓雷. hs-CRP、Lp-PLA2和S100β与缺血性脑小血管病患者认知障碍的相关性[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 265-269.
阅读次数
全文


摘要