中国现代医药杂志
中國現代醫藥雜誌
중국현대의약잡지
MODERN MEDICINE JOURNAL OF CHINA
2014年
10期
32-34
,共3页
重型颅脑损伤%标准大骨瓣减压术%传统骨瓣减压术%疗效
重型顱腦損傷%標準大骨瓣減壓術%傳統骨瓣減壓術%療效
중형로뇌손상%표준대골판감압술%전통골판감압술%료효
Severe craniocerebral trauma%Standard large trauma craniotomy%Traditional decompression%Curative ef-fect
目的：对比分析标准大骨瓣减压术与传统骨瓣减压术治疗重型颅脑损伤的并发症及疗效。方法将102例重型颅脑损伤患者分为两组，治疗组52例采用标准大骨瓣减压术治疗；对照组50例采用传统骨瓣减压术治疗。通过对术后并发症及术后12个月的GOS评分的分析比较，来评估两种手术方法的治疗效果。结果治疗组的恢复良好率为57.6%、死亡率为11.53%；对照组的恢复良好率为18%、死亡率为38%，两组比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。在并发症方面，治疗组的脑膨出发生率为5.67%，外伤性脑梗死发生率为3.84%；对照组的发生率分别为22%和16%，与对照组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。治疗组的迟发性颅内血肿、癫痫、颅内感染、脑积水的发生率与对照组比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论标准大骨瓣减压术具有手术视野相对开阔、减压范围广泛、副损伤小、扩大颅腔容积更为有效等优点，可以改善预后，降低死亡率。
目的：對比分析標準大骨瓣減壓術與傳統骨瓣減壓術治療重型顱腦損傷的併髮癥及療效。方法將102例重型顱腦損傷患者分為兩組，治療組52例採用標準大骨瓣減壓術治療；對照組50例採用傳統骨瓣減壓術治療。通過對術後併髮癥及術後12箇月的GOS評分的分析比較，來評估兩種手術方法的治療效果。結果治療組的恢複良好率為57.6%、死亡率為11.53%；對照組的恢複良好率為18%、死亡率為38%，兩組比較差異有統計學意義（P＜0.05）。在併髮癥方麵，治療組的腦膨齣髮生率為5.67%，外傷性腦梗死髮生率為3.84%；對照組的髮生率分彆為22%和16%，與對照組相比差異有統計學意義（P＜0.05）。治療組的遲髮性顱內血腫、癲癇、顱內感染、腦積水的髮生率與對照組比較差異無統計學意義（P＞0.05）。結論標準大骨瓣減壓術具有手術視野相對開闊、減壓範圍廣汎、副損傷小、擴大顱腔容積更為有效等優點，可以改善預後，降低死亡率。
목적：대비분석표준대골판감압술여전통골판감압술치료중형로뇌손상적병발증급료효。방법장102례중형로뇌손상환자분위량조，치료조52례채용표준대골판감압술치료；대조조50례채용전통골판감압술치료。통과대술후병발증급술후12개월적GOS평분적분석비교，래평고량충수술방법적치료효과。결과치료조적회복량호솔위57.6%、사망솔위11.53%；대조조적회복량호솔위18%、사망솔위38%，량조비교차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。재병발증방면，치료조적뇌팽출발생솔위5.67%，외상성뇌경사발생솔위3.84%；대조조적발생솔분별위22%화16%，여대조조상비차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。치료조적지발성로내혈종、전간、로내감염、뇌적수적발생솔여대조조비교차이무통계학의의（P＞0.05）。결론표준대골판감압술구유수술시야상대개활、감압범위엄범、부손상소、확대로강용적경위유효등우점，가이개선예후，강저사망솔。
Objective To analyze the complication and curative effect of severe craniocerebral trauma respectively treated by standard large trauma craniotomy and traditional decompression. Methods 102 patients with severe craniocerebral trauma were divided into two groups, 52 cases in the treatment group adopted the standard large trauma craniotomy treatment, 50 cases in the control group adopted the traditional craniotomy decompression therapy. Evaluated the effect of two surgical methods by postoperative complications and GOS score analysis at 12 months postoperatively. Results The good recovery rate of treatment group was 57.6%, mortality was 11.53%. Good recovery rate of control group was 18%, mortality was 38%. There were significant differences between the two groups(P<0.05). In terms of complications, the incidence of encephalocele in treat-ment group was 5.67%, incidence of traumatic cerebral infarction was 3.84%, the incidence of encephaloocele and traumatic cerebral infarction in control group was 22% and 16% respectively, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the late-onset intracranial hematoma, epilepsy, intracranial infection, the incidence of hydro-cephalus between the two group (P>0.05). Conclusion Standard large trauma craniotomy decompression has relatively open field, decompression range, light deputy injury, can effectively expand the cranial cavity volume, it can improve the prognosis and reduce mortality.
