临床医学工程
臨床醫學工程
림상의학공정
CLINICAL MEDICAL ENGINEERING
2014年
7期
885-886
,共2页
双侧平衡去骨瓣减压术%传统单侧标准外伤大骨瓣减压术%重型颅脑损伤
雙側平衡去骨瓣減壓術%傳統單側標準外傷大骨瓣減壓術%重型顱腦損傷
쌍측평형거골판감압술%전통단측표준외상대골판감압술%중형로뇌손상
Bilateral balance decompressive craniectomy%Tradition unilateral standard decompressive craniectomy%Severe craniocerebral injury
目的：分析双侧平衡去骨瓣减压治疗重型闭合性颅脑损伤的疗效和安全性。方法选取我院于2011年12月至2013年12月收治的96例重型闭合性颅脑损伤患者，根据不同手术方法将其随机分成双侧组和单侧组，各48例，对两组患者的治疗效果及术后不良反应进行分析比较。结果两组患者在术后1凿、3凿的颅内压均比治疗前显著降低，双侧组患者的颅内压下降幅度更为显著，两组结果比较其差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)；双侧组的术后并发症明显少于单侧组，差两组结果比较其差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)；治疗结束后双侧组的生存质量显著高于单侧组，其差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论采用双侧平衡去骨瓣减压对重型闭合性颅脑损伤进行治疗，能够有效地将颅内压降低，且提高了患者术后的生存质量，值得临床推广与应用。
目的：分析雙側平衡去骨瓣減壓治療重型閉閤性顱腦損傷的療效和安全性。方法選取我院于2011年12月至2013年12月收治的96例重型閉閤性顱腦損傷患者，根據不同手術方法將其隨機分成雙側組和單側組，各48例，對兩組患者的治療效果及術後不良反應進行分析比較。結果兩組患者在術後1鑿、3鑿的顱內壓均比治療前顯著降低，雙側組患者的顱內壓下降幅度更為顯著，兩組結果比較其差異具有統計學意義(P<0.05)；雙側組的術後併髮癥明顯少于單側組，差兩組結果比較其差異具有統計學意義(P<0.05)；治療結束後雙側組的生存質量顯著高于單側組，其差異具有統計學意義(P<0.05)。結論採用雙側平衡去骨瓣減壓對重型閉閤性顱腦損傷進行治療，能夠有效地將顱內壓降低，且提高瞭患者術後的生存質量，值得臨床推廣與應用。
목적：분석쌍측평형거골판감압치료중형폐합성로뇌손상적료효화안전성。방법선취아원우2011년12월지2013년12월수치적96례중형폐합성로뇌손상환자，근거불동수술방법장기수궤분성쌍측조화단측조，각48례，대량조환자적치료효과급술후불량반응진행분석비교。결과량조환자재술후1착、3착적로내압균비치료전현저강저，쌍측조환자적로내압하강폭도경위현저，량조결과비교기차이구유통계학의의(P<0.05)；쌍측조적술후병발증명현소우단측조，차량조결과비교기차이구유통계학의의(P<0.05)；치료결속후쌍측조적생존질량현저고우단측조，기차이구유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론채용쌍측평형거골판감압대중형폐합성로뇌손상진행치료，능구유효지장로내압강저，차제고료환자술후적생존질량，치득림상추엄여응용。
Objective To analyze the efficacy and safety of bilateral decompressive craniectomy balanced treatment of severe closed craniocerebral injury. Methods 96 cases of severe closed head injury patients in our hospital from December 2011 to December 2013 were randomly divided into a bilateral group and an unilateral group according to the surgical method, with 48 cases in each. The primary outcome was a comparative analysis of the postoperative treatment effects and adverse reactions between the two groups. Results The intracranial pressure of the two groups in the postoperative 1st d, 3rd d were significantly lower than before. The intracranial pressure of the bilateral group declined more significantly, and the results of the two groups were statistically significant different (P <0.05). The postoperative complications in the bilateral group was significantly less than that in the unilateral group, with statistical significance (P<0.05). The quality of life after the treatment of the bilateral group was significantly higher than that of the unilateral group, with the statistical significance (P<0.05). Conclusions The bilateral balance decompressive craniectomy for the treatment of severe closed craniocerebral injury can reduce intracranial pressure effectively, and improve the quality of life in patients. It is worthy of promotion and application.
