切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (01) : 21 -26. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-123X.2022.01.003

临床研究

不同微创手术方式治疗自发性脑出血疗效对比:单中心回顾性分析
谭潇潇1, 付雄洁1, 俞晓波1, 严锋1, 陈高1,()   
  1. 1. 310009 杭州,浙江大学医学院附属第二医院神经外科
  • 收稿日期:2021-09-23 出版日期:2022-02-15
  • 通信作者: 陈高
  • 基金资助:
    "十三五"国家重点研发计划(2018YFC1312600、2018YFC1312603)

Effect of minimally invasive surgery for intracerebral hemorrhage: a single center retrospective analysis

Xiaoxiao Tan1, Xiongjie Fu1, Xiaobo Yu1, Feng Yan1, Gao Chen1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310009, China
  • Received:2021-09-23 Published:2022-02-15
  • Corresponding author: Gao Chen
引用本文:

谭潇潇, 付雄洁, 俞晓波, 严锋, 陈高. 不同微创手术方式治疗自发性脑出血疗效对比:单中心回顾性分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2022, 12(01): 21-26.

Xiaoxiao Tan, Xiongjie Fu, Xiaobo Yu, Feng Yan, Gao Chen. Effect of minimally invasive surgery for intracerebral hemorrhage: a single center retrospective analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Brain Diseases and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2022, 12(01): 21-26.

目的

评估不同微创手术方式治疗自发性脑出血(ICH)的安全性、有效性及长期预后。

方法

回顾性分析浙江大学医学院附属第二医院神经外科自2019年1月至2020年12月收治的微创手术治疗的356例ICH患者相关资料,根据手术方式的不同,将患者分为内镜组、立体定向组、小骨窗开颅组。分析3组患者的基线资料、围术期以及长期预后情况,评估不同微创手术方式治疗ICH的安全性、有效性。

结果

本研究共纳入356例患者,其中内镜手术组116例,立体定向组135例,小骨窗开颅组105例。3组患者的年龄、性别、既往病史、出血位置以及术前GCS评分等基线资料比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);内镜组与立体定向组手术时长和术中失血量明显少于小骨窗开颅组,而立体定向组术后再发出血率明显高于其他2组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。内镜组和小骨窗开颅组术后24 h血肿清除率高于立体定向组,内镜组术后3 d血肿清除率优于小骨窗开颅组和立体定向组,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05),而小骨窗开颅组与立体定向组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后7 d立体定向组和内镜组NIHSS评分明显低于小骨窗开颅组,预后良好率亦高于小骨窗开颅组;术后6个月内镜组和立体定向组NIHSS评分明显低于小骨窗开颅组,预后良好率高于小骨窗开颅组,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

微创手术方式治疗ICH效果明确,可明显改善患者的长期预后,其中内镜辅助下血肿清除术血肿清除效率高且并发症少。

Objective

To evaluated the safety, efficacy and longterm prognosis of different minimally invasive surgery treatments in patient with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).

Methods

Patients with basal ganglia hemorrhage, admitted to Neurosurgery Department of Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University from January 2019 to December 2020, were divided into three groups: small bone window craniotomy (SBWC) group, endoscopic surgery (ES) group and stereotactic hematoma aspiration followed by urokinase (SHAU) group. The baseline characteristics, perioperative information and lone-term outcome data of the three groups were analyzed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of different minimally invasive treatments in the treatment of ICH.

Results

There were 356 patients in this group, including 116 cases in ES group, 135 cases in SHAU group and 105 cases in SBWC group. No significant differences were observed among all three groups the baseline characteristics, including age, sex, hematoma location, GCS score, NIHSS score and hematoma volume (P>0.05). There were significant differences among the three groups with respect to the operative blood loss and operative time (P<0.05). The rebleeding rate in the SHAU groups was significantly higher than in the other two groups (P<0.05). The evacuation rate 24 h after operation in AMWC and ES groups was significantly higher than SHAU group (P<0.05). The evacuation rate 3 d after operation in ES group was better than that in SBWC group and SHAU group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between SBWC group and SHAU group (P>0.05). On 7 d after surgery, the NIHSS score in ES and SHAU groups were significantly higher than the AMWC group, the good prognosis rate in ES and SHAU groups were significantly higher than the AMWC group (P<0.05). Six months after surgery, the NIHSS score in ES and SHAU groups were significantly higher than the AMWC group, the good prognosis rate in ES and SHAU groups were significantly higher than the AMWC group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Minimally invasive surgery has a definite effect on the treatment of ICH and can significantly improve the long-term outcome. Among them, endoscopic surgery has high hematoma removal efficiency and fewer complications.

表1 3组患者基线资料比较
表2 3组患者术中情况比较(Mean±SD)
表3 3组患者术后情况及短期预后比较
表4 3组患者长期预后比较
[1]
Keep RF, Hua Y, Xi G. Intracerebral haemorrhage: mechanisms of injury and therapeutic targets[J]. Lancet Neurol, 2012, 11(8): 720-731.
[2]
Claude Hemphill J 3rd, Lam A. Emergency neurological life support: intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Neurocrit Care, 2017, 27(Suppl 1): 89-101.
[3]
Mendelow AD, Gregson BA, Fernandes HM, et al. Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haematomas in the internationalSurgical Trial in Intracerebral Haemorrhage (STICH): a randomised trial[J]. Lancet, 2005, 365(9457): 387-397.
[4]
Mendelow AD, Gregson BA, Rowan EN, et al. Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial lobar intracerebral haematomas (STICH II): a randomised trial[J]. Lancet, 2013, 382(9890): 397-408.
[5]
Hersh EH, Gologorsky Y, Chartrain AG, et al. Minimally invasive surgery for intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep, 2018, 18(6): 34.
[6]
Guo W, Liu H, Tan Z, et al. Comparison of endoscopic evacuation, stereotactic aspiration, and craniotomy for treatment of basal ganglia hemorrhage[J]. J Neurointerv Surg, 2020, 12(1): 55-61.
[7]
Fu C, Wang N, Chen B, et al. Surgical Management of moderate basal ganglia intracerebral hemorrhage: comparison of safety and efficacy of endoscopic surgery, minimally invasive puncture and drainage, and craniotomy[J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 122: e995-e1001.
[8]
Fu X, Zeng H, Zhao J, et al. Inhibition of dectin-1 ameliorates neuroinflammation by regulating microglia/macrophage phenotype after intracerebral hemorrhage in mice[J]. Transl Stroke Res, 2021, 12(6): 1018-1034.
[9]
Kwon SM, Choi KS, Yi HJ, et al. Impact of brain atrophy on 90-day functional outcome after moderate-volume basal ganglia hemorrhage[J]. Sci Rep, 2018, 8(1): 4819.
[10]
Zhu H, Wang Z, Yu J, et al. Role and mechanisms of cytokines in the secondary brain injury after intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Prog Neurobiol, 2019, 178: 101610.
[11]
Fu X, Zhou G, Wu X, et al. Inhibition of P2X4R attenuates white matter injury in mice after intracerebral hemorrhage by regulating microglial phenotypes[J]. J Neuroinflammation, 2021, 18(1): 184.
[12]
Xi G, Hua Y, Bhasin RR, et al. Mechanisms of edema formation after intracerebral hemorrhage: effects of extravasated red blood cells on blood flow and blood-brain barrier integrity[J]. Stroke, 2001, 32(12): 2932-2938.
[13]
Lopez Valdes E, Hernandez Lain A, Calandre L, et al. Time window for clinical effectiveness of mass evacuation in a rat balloon model mimicking an intraparenchymatous hematoma[J]. J Neurol Sci, 2000, 174(1): 40-46.
[14]
Chambers IR, Banister K, Mendelow AD. Intracranial pressure within a developing intracerebral haemorrhage[J]. Br J Neurosurg, 2001, 15(2): 140-141.
[15]
Xu X, Zheng Y, Chen X, et al. Comparison of endoscopic evacuation, stereotactic aspiration and craniotomy for the treatment of supratentorial hypertensive intracerebral haemorrhage: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial[J]. Trials, 2017, 18(1): 296.
[16]
Cusack TJ, Carhuapoma JR, Ziai WC. Update on the treatment of spontaneous intraparenchymal hemorrhage: medical and interventional management[J]. Curr Treat Options Neurol, 2018, 20(1): 1.
[17]
Sun S, Li Y, Zhang H, et al. Neuroendoscopic surgery versus craniotomy for supratentorial hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. World Neurosurg, 2020, 134: 477-488.
[1] 袁成雪, 张宗霞, 许婷, 斯郎拉姆. 三种内镜手术治疗结肠息肉的效果及安全性观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 78-81.
[2] 张海涛, 康婵娟, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎效果观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 654-657.
[3] 李炳根, 龚独辉, 赖泽如, 聂向阳. 产后腹直肌分离全腔镜下肌后/腹膜外补片修补术的临床研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 724-727.
[4] 张天献, 吕云福, 郑进方. 胆总管结石微创治疗进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 585-588.
[5] 侯文运, 刘恒昌, 窦利州, 陈海鹏, 郑朝旭, 王贵齐, 王锡山. 腹部无辅助切口内镜引导下取标本的腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌根治术(保留回盲部)(附视频)[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 436-440.
[6] 侯超, 潘美辰, 吴文明, 黄兴广, 李翔, 程凌雪, 朱玉轩, 李文波. 早期食管癌及上皮内瘤变内镜黏膜下剥离术后食管狭窄的危险因素[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 383-387.
[7] 孙欣欣, 刘军, 陈超伍, 孙超. 超声内镜引导细针穿刺抽吸术在胰腺占位性病变中的应用[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 418-421.
[8] 高显奎, 赵太云, 陆兴俊, 张洪领, 房修罗, 闫碧春, 王胤, 王永翠, 刘苗苗, 冉若男. 内镜电凝止血与组织胶注射治疗上消化道溃疡伴出血的疗效观察[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 452-455.
[9] 张政赢, 鞠阳, 刘晓宁. 二甲双胍对2型糖尿病患者大肠腺瘤术后复发的影响[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 485-488.
[10] 丁亚梅, 田野, 钱进, 陈梅, 季鸿颖. 良性胃溃疡出血患者内镜治疗术后再出血的危险因素分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 322-325.
[11] 许灿, 周鹏哲, 朱宁, 穆维娜. 超声内镜与磁共振胰胆管成像对胆总管泥沙样结石的诊断价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 359-362.
[12] 邱春华, 张志宏. 1108例小肠疾病的临床诊断及检查策略分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 948-954.
[13] 王亚丹, 吴静, 黄博洋, 王苗苗, 郭春梅, 宿慧, 王沧海, 王静, 丁鹏鹏, 刘红. 白光内镜下结直肠肿瘤性质预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 655-661.
[14] 孟科, 李燕, 闫婧爽, 闫斌. 胶囊内镜胃通过时间的影响因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 671-675.
[15] 陈柯豫, 黄艳齐, 张玲利. 同时性多发早期食管癌及高级别上皮内瘤变的危险因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 524-528.
阅读次数
全文


摘要