Objective To explore effect and indications of drainage minimally invasive soft and hard puncture needle in treatment of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. Methods A total of 216 patients with minimally invasive puncture and drainage in treatment of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage were divided into 112 patients with soft channel treatment (group A) and 104 patients with hard passage ( group B) , and the efficacy, complications and draining time of two groups were observed and com- pared. Results The total mortality rate of two groups was 15. 3% . The mortality rate of group A was 13.4% , and the mortality rate of group B was 17. 3% . There was no significant difference between the two groups ( P > 0. 05 ). The average operative time of group A was 7. 6 min and group B was 3. 8 min. There was a significant difference between two groups ( P 0.05). The average intraventricular hematomas were 4.8 d of group A and 5.9 d of group B, and there was a significant difference between two groups (P 0.05) , and the differences in incidence rates of residual of intracranial bone pieces, intracranial infection and the bleeding of puncture needle tract were significantly different (P < 0. 05). Conclusion The method of minimally invasive puncture needle of soft and hard channel is helpful in treatment of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. Clinicians should pay more attention to different indications to achieve ideal curative effect.%目的 探讨软、硬通道微创穿刺引流术治疗高血压脑出血的效果和适应证.方法 选择我院采用微创穿刺引流术治疗的高血压脑出血216例,其中112例经软通道治疗(软通道组),104例经硬通道治疗(硬通道组),观察比较两组治疗效果和并发症发生情况等.结果 两组总病死率15.3％,软通道组病死率13.4％,硬通道组病死率17.3％,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)；手术操作时间软通道组平均7.6 min,硬通道组平均3.8 min,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).脑实质内血肿引流时间软通道组平均4.6d,硬通道组平均4.9d,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)；脑室内血肿引流时间软通道组平均4.8d,硬通道组平均5.9d,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).两组肺炎、应激性溃疡发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),颅内碎骨片残留率、颅内感染发生率及穿刺针道出血率比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 软、硬通道微创穿刺引流术治疗高血压脑出血均有良好效果,但其适应证不同,临床工作中应区别对待.
展开▼
