钻孔引流术与钻孔微创穿刺术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿对比分析

李健康

（陕西省西乡县人民医院，陕西 汉中，723500）

浏览次数：105次 下载次数：387次

摘要：

目的 观察钻孔引流术与钻孔微创穿刺术在慢性硬膜下血肿临床治疗中的效果及安全性。方法 将收治的98例慢性硬膜下血肿患者随机分为对照组和观察组，分别采用钻孔引流术与钻孔微创穿刺术治疗，比较两组患者的治疗总有效率，手术时间、术后恢复时间等手术指标改善情况以及随访并发症发生情况。结果 治疗后观察组总有效率达85.71%，显著高于对照组的69.39%（P<0.05）；观察组患者的手术时间、术后恢复时间短于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；观察组患者术中出血量、术后残液量少于对照组（P<0.05）；观察组不良反应发生率显著低于对照组（P<0.05）。结论 采用钻孔微创穿刺术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿临床效果显著，安全性高，值得临床推广应用。

关键词：钻孔引流；微创穿刺；硬膜下血肿

中图分类号：R459.7文献标志码：A文章编号：2096-1413(2017)11-0069-02

Comparation study of drilling drainage and drilling of minimally invasive puncture in the treatment

of chronic subdural hematoma
LI Jian-kang
(People's Hospital of Xixiang County, Hanzhong 723500, China)

ABSTRACT: Objective To observe the clinical effect and safety of drilling drainage and drilling minimally invasive procedure in the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma. Methods Ninety -eight cases of chronic subdural hematoma patients were randomly divided into control group and observation group, drilling drainage treatment was used in the control group, while drilling minimally invasive puncture treatment was used in the observation group. The total effective rate, operation time, postoperative recovery time and other operation index, follow-up complications were observed between the two groups. Results After treatment, the total effective rate of the observation group was 85.71%, which was significantly higher than 69.39% of the control group (P<0.05); the operation time, postoperative recovery time of the observation group were shorter than those of the control group (P<0.05); the intraoperative blood loss, postoperative residual fluid amount of the observation group were less than those of the control group (P<0.05); the incidence rate of adverse reactions of the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P<0.05). Conclusion The clinical effect of minimally invasive puncture on chronic subdural hematoma is remarkable, with high security, which is worthy of clinical application.

KEYWORDS: drilling drainage; minimally invasive puncture; subdural hematoma

参考文献：
[1] 袁丁,王亮,陈治强.钻孔引流术与微创穿刺术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿的临床疗效比较[J].实用心脑肺血管病杂志,2012,20(7):1157-1158.

[2] 黎明,任祖东,李明,等.症状性慢性硬膜下血肿钻孔置管骨膜下引流的临床疗效观察[J].立体定向和功能性神经外科杂志,2016,29(3):181-184.
[3] 叶坤,李成勋.微创锥孔与常规钻孔引流治疗慢性硬膜下血肿对比分析[J].当代医学,2012,18(15):95-96.
[4] 周静,杨华.微创单钻孔持续冲洗闭式引流穿刺术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿50例临床分析[J].立体定向和功能性神经外科杂志,2014,27(3):182-184.
[5] 张沛光,张可帅.微创穿刺术与钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿疗效比较[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2014,17(8):109-110.
[6] 董芯.微创穿刺术与钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿的临床价值观察[J].中国医药指南,2013,11(13):581-582.
[7] 江辉,赵京涛.微创穿刺术与钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿的对比研究[J].临床神经外科杂志,2012,9(6):331-332.
[8] 刘骏辉,陈谦学,张锐,等.微创穿刺术对比传统钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿疗效分析-meta 分析[J].国际神经病学神经外科学杂志,2015,42(3):216-222.
[9] 张敏新.微创穿刺术与钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿的疗效评价[J].河南科技大学学报,2011,29(1):55-56.
[10] 翟俊忠,王润起,王新民.微创穿刺术与钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿的临床价值[J].中国医药指南,2013,11(26):159-160.