Objective:To compare the simplicity, safety, efficacy, prognoses and economic burden of CAS-R-2 frameless stereotactic device and Leksell frame stereotactic device in assisting surgery for patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage (ICH, hematoma volume: 20-40 mL).Methods:The clinical data of 120 patients with supratentorial ICH, admitted to our hospital from December 2012 to December 2019, were retrospectively analyzed; trepanation and drainage assisted by CAS-R-2 frameless stereotactic device was performed in 65 patients (frameless group), and trepanation and drainage assisted by Leksell frame stereotactic device was performed in 55 patients (frame group). The differences of surgery time, hematoma evacuation rate 7 d after surgery, incidences of recurrent hemorrhage and intracranial infection during hospitalization, length and expense of hospitalization, and modified Rankin scale (mRs) scores 6 months after surgery were compared between the two groups.Results:As compared with those in the frame group, patients from the frameless group had significantly shorter surgery time ([0.5±0.1] h vs. [2.2±0.5] h), significantly lower incidence of recurrent hemorrhage (0% vs. 9.1%) and significantly lower incidence of intracranial infection (1.5% vs. 9.1%) during hospitalization ( P<0.05). The hospitalization expense of patients from the frame group was significantly lower than that in the frameless group ( P<0.05). There were no significant differences in hematoma evacuation rate 7 d after surgery, length of hospital stays, and mortality and mRs scores 6 months after treatment between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:For patients with supratentorial ICH, trepanation and drainage assisted by CAS-R-2 frameless stereotactic device has the same curative effect and prognoses as Leksell frame stereotactic one; the former has higher simplicity and clinical safety, and the latter has lower economic burden.