中国医药科学
中國醫藥科學
중국의약과학
CHINA MEDICINE AND PHARMACY
2013年
14期
162-163
,共2页
颅内动脉瘤%血管内支架%栓塞
顱內動脈瘤%血管內支架%栓塞
로내동맥류%혈관내지가%전새
Intracranial aneurysm%Endovascular stent implantation%Embolization
目的研究血管内支架植入辅助弹簧圈栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤的疗效。方法选择2009年3月~2012年3月我院收治的50例颅内动脉瘤患者进行回顾性分析。按照治疗方法不同将患者分为实验组和对照组。实验组采用血管内支架植入辅助弹簧圈栓塞对患者进行治疗,对照组采用单纯开颅手术对患者进行治疗。治疗后,采用格拉斯哥预后评分(GCS)标准,对两组患者治疗的临床疗效进行比较分析。结果本研究发现实验组患者治疗的良好率(68%)明显高于对照组(40%);实验组患者术后死亡率(0)明显低于对照组(16%),实验组患者的癫痫发生率(8%)也明显低于对照组(32%),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论血管内支架植入辅助弹簧圈栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤,疗效明显优于单纯开颅手术。
目的研究血管內支架植入輔助彈簧圈栓塞治療顱內動脈瘤的療效。方法選擇2009年3月~2012年3月我院收治的50例顱內動脈瘤患者進行迴顧性分析。按照治療方法不同將患者分為實驗組和對照組。實驗組採用血管內支架植入輔助彈簧圈栓塞對患者進行治療,對照組採用單純開顱手術對患者進行治療。治療後,採用格拉斯哥預後評分(GCS)標準,對兩組患者治療的臨床療效進行比較分析。結果本研究髮現實驗組患者治療的良好率(68%)明顯高于對照組(40%);實驗組患者術後死亡率(0)明顯低于對照組(16%),實驗組患者的癲癇髮生率(8%)也明顯低于對照組(32%),兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。結論血管內支架植入輔助彈簧圈栓塞治療顱內動脈瘤,療效明顯優于單純開顱手術。
목적연구혈관내지가식입보조탄황권전새치료로내동맥류적료효。방법선택2009년3월~2012년3월아원수치적50례로내동맥류환자진행회고성분석。안조치료방법불동장환자분위실험조화대조조。실험조채용혈관내지가식입보조탄황권전새대환자진행치료,대조조채용단순개로수술대환자진행치료。치료후,채용격랍사가예후평분(GCS)표준,대량조환자치료적림상료효진행비교분석。결과본연구발현실험조환자치료적량호솔(68%)명현고우대조조(40%);실험조환자술후사망솔(0)명현저우대조조(16%),실험조환자적전간발생솔(8%)야명현저우대조조(32%),량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론혈관내지가식입보조탄황권전새치료로내동맥류,료효명현우우단순개로수술。
Objective To study the effect of endovascular stent implantation combined with guglielmi detachable coil embolization(ESIGDC) on intracranial aneurysm(IA). Methods 50 cases of IA patients who were admitted into our hospital from Mar. 2009 to Mar. 2012 were selected as the subjects and divided into test group and control group according to their clinic time and treatment method. The test group was treated with ESIGDC,while the control group was treated with simple craniotomy. The GCS prognostic scoring standards were applied to comparatively analyze the clinical effect of two groups. Results In this study,the good rate of test group(68%) was obviously higher than control group(40%). The mortality rate of test group(0)was obviously lower than control group(16%),meanwhile,the epilepsy occurrence rate of test group(8%) was obviously lower than control group(32%),there was a statistical significance between two groups(P<0.05). Conclusion The clinical effect of ESIGDC is obviously superior to simple craniotomy on IA therapy.