A comparison analysis between endoscopy and craniotomy evacuation of hematoma for hypertensive intra-cerebral hemorrhage
10.3969/j.issn.1002-0152.2016.10.007
- VernacularTitle:神经内镜微创手术与开颅血肿清除术治疗高血压脑出血疗效比较
- Author:
Xin GE
;
Xiaolei CHEN
;
Jiqing SUN
;
Duo LI
- Keywords:
Intracerebral hemorrhage;
Endoscope
- From:
Chinese Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases
2016;42(10):605-608
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective We investigated the value of endoscopic evacuation and craniotomy of the hypertensive in?tracerebral hemorrhage to determine which methods are more suitable for the patients. Methods One hundred twenty pa?tients with hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage participated this study. They were divided into classic surgical evalua?tion group (n=60) and endoscopic surgical evaluation group (n=60) according to their corresponding surgery strategies. Each patient was assessed by the preoperative Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), the mean rate and time of hematoma evacua?tion from onset to operation, the postoperative GCS, the mean time of admission in neuro-intensive care unit (NICU) and Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) at 3 month after surgery. Results The continuous (≥3 months) follow-up surveys were all completed by 120 patients. There was no statistical difference in clinical data before operation between two groups (P>0.05). However, clearance of hematoma was much faster and more efficient in endoscopic surgical group than in classic surgical evaluation group (1.5 ± 0.4 vs.3.9 ± 0.6 h, P<0.01; 95.84 ± 2.72% vs.87.48 ± 7.84%, P<0.01). The GCS scores were 10(6,12),12(8,13) and 13(10,13) in endoscopic surgical group whereas were 6(5,9),7(5,11).8(5, 12) in craniotomy group at 1,3 and 7 d followed operation. GCS scores were higher in surgical group than in craniotomy group at all time points (P<0.01). In addition, patients receiving endoscopic treatment showed a shorter NICU admission time than those receiving craniotomy (3.55±4.21d vs. 9.10±4.72d, P<0.01). The intracranial infection and hypostatic pneumonia were sig?nificantly lower in endoscopic than in craniotomy surgery group (0 vs.6 cases; 5 vs. 41 cases, P<0.05). The endoscopic treatment significantly improved the GOS score compared with craniotomy [3(3, 4)vs. 2(2, 3)] (P<0.01). Conclusion Endoscopic evacuation of hematoma for hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage is efficient and minimally invasive, which is superior to craniotomy.
