Ke-Shan Liang1,2,3,1, Jian Ding3,1, Cheng-Bin Yin4, Li-Jing Peng5, Zhen-Chuan Liu6, Xiao Guo2, Shu-Yu Liang7, Yong Zhang3, Sheng-Nian Zhou1. 1. Department of Neurology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University and Brain Science Research Institute, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. 2. Department of Neurology, Pingyi Branch of Qilu Hospital, Shandong University, Pingyi, Shandong, China. 3. Department of Neurology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. 4. Department of Emergency, Qingdao Branch of Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. 5. Department of Clinical Laboratory, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. 6. Department of Neurological Intensive Care Unit, Linyi People's Hospital, Shandong University, Linyi, Shandong, China. 7. Medical English Class Three of 2012 Grade, Taishan Medical University, Tai'an, Shandong, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the curative effect of different treatment methods of hypertensive putamen hemorrhage, in order to determine an ideal method of treatment; and to explore the curative effect of the application of soft channel technology-minimally invasive liquefaction and drainage of intracerebral hematoma in the treatment of hypertensive putamen hemorrhage. METHODS: Patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage, who were treated in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2016, were included into this study. Patients were divided into three groups: minimally invasive drainage group, internal medical treatment group and craniotomy group. In the minimally invasive drainage group, puncture aspiration and drainage were performed according to different hematoma conditions detected in brain CT, the frontal approach was selected for putamen and intracerebral hemorrhage, and drainage was reserved until the hematoma disappeared in CT detection. Drug therapy was dominated in the internal medical treatment group, while surgery under general anesthesia was performed to remove the hematoma in the craniotomy group. RESULTS: Post-treatment neurological function defect scores in minimally invasive drainage group and internal medical group were 16.14 ± 11.27 and 31.43 ± 10.42, respectively; and the difference was remarkably significant (P< 0.01). Post-treatment neurological function defect scores in the minimally invasive drainage group and craniotomy group were 16.14 ± 11.27 and 24.20 ± 12.23, respectively; and the difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). There was a remarkable significant difference in ADL1-2 level during followed-up in survival patients between the minimally invasive drainage group and internal medical treatment group (P< 0.01), and there was a significant difference in followed-up mortality between these two groups (P< 0.01). CONCLUSION: Clinical observation and following-up results revealed that minimally invasive drainage treatment was superior to internal medical treatment and craniotomy.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the curative effect of different treatment methods of hypertensive putamen hemorrhage, in order to determine an ideal method of treatment; and to explore the curative effect of the application of soft channel technology-minimally invasive liquefaction and drainage of intracerebral hematoma in the treatment of hypertensive putamen hemorrhage. METHODS:Patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage, who were treated in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2016, were included into this study. Patients were divided into three groups: minimally invasive drainage group, internal medical treatment group and craniotomy group. In the minimally invasive drainage group, puncture aspiration and drainage were performed according to different hematoma conditions detected in brain CT, the frontal approach was selected for putamen and intracerebral hemorrhage, and drainage was reserved until the hematoma disappeared in CT detection. Drug therapy was dominated in the internal medical treatment group, while surgery under general anesthesia was performed to remove the hematoma in the craniotomy group. RESULTS: Post-treatment neurological function defect scores in minimally invasive drainage group and internal medical group were 16.14 ± 11.27 and 31.43 ± 10.42, respectively; and the difference was remarkably significant (P< 0.01). Post-treatment neurological function defect scores in the minimally invasive drainage group and craniotomy group were 16.14 ± 11.27 and 24.20 ± 12.23, respectively; and the difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). There was a remarkable significant difference in ADL1-2 level during followed-up in survival patients between the minimally invasive drainage group and internal medical treatment group (P< 0.01), and there was a significant difference in followed-up mortality between these two groups (P< 0.01). CONCLUSION: Clinical observation and following-up results revealed that minimally invasive drainage treatment was superior to internal medical treatment and craniotomy.