目的：评价经微导管机械碎栓和支架取栓两种方法结合动脉内溶栓治疗急性脑动脉闭塞的疗效及安全性。方法回顾性分析49例应用微导管机械碎栓和支架取栓治疗的急性脑血管闭塞患者的临床资料。结果碎栓组血管再通率80.1％，取栓组血管再通率82.4％，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。2组术后NIHSS评分较术前明显下降，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。2组术后ADL评分均明显高于术前，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论支架取栓术的临床疗效和安全性值得肯定，与碎栓组血管相当。碎栓技术更容易推广应用，临床上可根据具体情况选择合适的治疗方法。%Objective To explore the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy by catheter and embolectomy by‐stents combined with intra‐arterial thrombolysis in the treatment of acute cerebral artery occlusion.Methods 49 patients of a‐cute cerebral artery occlusion were treated by micro‐mechanical thrombectomy catheter or bracket embolectomy and the data were retrospectively reviewed .Results The recanalization rate of micro‐mechanical thrombectomy catheter or bracket embolec‐tomy was respectively 80.1% and 82.4%.The difference of the two groups was not significant(P>0.05).Compared with sur‐gery before ,NIHSS scores of both two groups after surgery significantly decreased ,and the difference was significant(P<0.05).Compared with surgery before ,ADL scores of both two groups after surgery significantly increased ,and the difference was significant(P<0.05).Conclusion Although the efficacy and safety of embolectomy is deserved to affirm ,the rate of revas‐cularization in the group treated with mechanical thrombectomy is not lower than the group treated with embolectomy .Accord‐ing to our study ,mechanical thrombectomy is easier topopularize and apply in the clinic and in practice ,we should choose the ap‐propriate treatment according to different situations .
展开▼
