中华神经医学杂志
中華神經醫學雜誌
중화신경의학잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF NEUROMEDICINE
2011年
3期
299-302
,共4页
单臻%陈昆%黄育婵%林佳平
單臻%陳昆%黃育嬋%林佳平
단진%진곤%황육선%림가평
脑积水%脑室腹腔分流术%可调压分流管%儿童
腦積水%腦室腹腔分流術%可調壓分流管%兒童
뇌적수%뇌실복강분류술%가조압분류관%인동
Hydrocephalus%Ventriculoperitoneal shunt%Adjustable valve%Children
目的 探讨可调压与非可调压分流管治疗儿童交通性脑积水的效果.方法 中山大学附属第一医院神经外科自2003年1月至2009年12月行侧脑室腹腔分流术(VPS)治疗交通性脑积水儿童患者66例,其中采用Codman Hakim可调压分流管27例,采用Medtronic非可调压分流管39例,比较可调压分流管组和非可调压分流管组患者的并发症和分流装置平均生存时间.结果 2组患者分流管相关性感染、脑室端和腹腔端堵塞、硬膜下积液或血肿的发生率比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).可调压分流管组分流装置平均生存时间为52.55个月,非可调压分流管组分流装置平均生存时间为42.33个月,2组分流装置生存曲线相比较差异无统计学意义(x2=0.763,P=0.382).结论 与非可调压分流管相比,未发现使用可调压分流管治疗儿童交通性脑积水有明显的优势.
目的 探討可調壓與非可調壓分流管治療兒童交通性腦積水的效果.方法 中山大學附屬第一醫院神經外科自2003年1月至2009年12月行側腦室腹腔分流術(VPS)治療交通性腦積水兒童患者66例,其中採用Codman Hakim可調壓分流管27例,採用Medtronic非可調壓分流管39例,比較可調壓分流管組和非可調壓分流管組患者的併髮癥和分流裝置平均生存時間.結果 2組患者分流管相關性感染、腦室耑和腹腔耑堵塞、硬膜下積液或血腫的髮生率比較差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05).可調壓分流管組分流裝置平均生存時間為52.55箇月,非可調壓分流管組分流裝置平均生存時間為42.33箇月,2組分流裝置生存麯線相比較差異無統計學意義(x2=0.763,P=0.382).結論 與非可調壓分流管相比,未髮現使用可調壓分流管治療兒童交通性腦積水有明顯的優勢.
목적 탐토가조압여비가조압분류관치료인동교통성뇌적수적효과.방법 중산대학부속제일의원신경외과자2003년1월지2009년12월행측뇌실복강분류술(VPS)치료교통성뇌적수인동환자66례,기중채용Codman Hakim가조압분류관27례,채용Medtronic비가조압분류관39례,비교가조압분류관조화비가조압분류관조환자적병발증화분류장치평균생존시간.결과 2조환자분류관상관성감염、뇌실단화복강단도새、경막하적액혹혈종적발생솔비교차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05).가조압분류관조분류장치평균생존시간위52.55개월,비가조압분류관조분류장치평균생존시간위42.33개월,2조분류장치생존곡선상비교차이무통계학의의(x2=0.763,P=0.382).결론 여비가조압분류관상비,미발현사용가조압분류관치료인동교통성뇌적수유명현적우세.
Objective To analyze the outcomes of adjustable and set-pressure valves in the management of communicating hydrocephalus in children. Methods A retrospective study reviewing the medical records of 66 children with communicating hydrocephalus who received ventriculoperitoneal shunt at our center from January 2003 to December 2009 was performed. All the patients were divided into 2 groups: Codman Hakim adjustable valve group (n=27) and Medtronic set-pressure valve group (n=39). Rate of appearing complication and shunt survival time were analyzed between the 2 groups.Results The rate of shunt infection, proximal or distal obstruction, subdural hematoma and subdural hygroma showed no statistical significance between patients of the adjustable and set-pressure valve groups (P=1.000, P=0.727, P=0.455, P=0.691, respectively). The average shunt survival time of children in the adjustable valve group was 52.551 months (38.169-66.852, 95% CI) and that of children in the set-pressure valve group was 42.327 (31.636-53.019, 95%CI); no statistical significance on the average shunt survival time between these 2 groups was noted (x2=0.763, P=0.382).Conclusion The adjustable valve is not superior to set-pressure valve in the treatment of communicating hydrocephalus in children.