Removal and drainage of hematoma by small bone window craniotomy versus minimally invasive puncture and aspiration in treatment of cerebral hemorrhage patients with coagulation disorders in early stage

NIU Xiaoning; WANG Wenbo; HU Weiqiang; MA Zhaohuan; MA Gang; JIANG Yezhen; YAN Chi; ZHAO Wan

doi:10.7619/jcmp.201921029

Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice > 2019 > 23(21): 101-103, 107. > DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201921029

NIU Xiaoning, WANG Wenbo, HU Weiqiang, MA Zhaohuan, MA Gang, JIANG Yezhen, YAN Chi, ZHAO Wan. Removal and drainage of hematoma by small bone window craniotomy versus minimally invasive puncture and aspiration in treatment of cerebral hemorrhage patients with coagulation disorders in early stage[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2019, 23(21): 101-103, 107. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201921029

Citation:

PDF (462 KB)

Removal and drainage of hematoma by small bone window craniotomy versus minimally invasive puncture and aspiration in treatment of cerebral hemorrhage patients with coagulation disorders in early stage

1.
Department of Surgery, Xi'an Beihuan Hospital, Xi'an, Shaanxi, 710032
2.
Department of Blood Transfusion, Jingyang County Hospital in Xianyang City, Xianyang, Shaanxi, 713700

More Information

Received Date: August 11, 2019
Available Online: February 28, 2021
Published Date: November 14, 2019

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To compare the efficiency of removal and drainage of hematoma by small bone window craniotomy versus minimally invasive puncture and aspiration in treatment of cerebral hemorrhage patients with coagulation disorders in early stage.
Methods From March 2009 to March 2018, 84 cerebral hemorrhage patients with coagulation disorders in early stage were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with 42 cases in each group. The control group was treated with removal and drainage of hematoma by small bone window craniotomy, while the observation group was treated with minimally invasive puncture and aspiration. The efficiency was compared between two groups.
Results The short-term effect of the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group (P < 0.05). Six months after operation, 26 patients in the observation group could take care of themselves, accounting for 63.41%, but only 13 patients in the control group did, accounting for 35.14%, and there was a significant difference (P < 0.05). The absorption time of hematoma in the observation group was (12.17±2.24) days, which was significantly shorter than (28.41±4.39) days in the control group (P < 0.05). The neurological deficit score in the observation group was (9.58±2.03) points, which was significantly lower than (16.57±3.14) points in the control group (P < 0.05). The recurrence rate of hematoma in the observation group was 16.67%, which was significantly lower than 38.10% in the control group (P < 0.05).
Conclusion Minimally invasive puncture and aspiration is safe and effective in the treatment of cerebral hemorrhage patients with abnormal coagulation function, which has the advantages of simple manipulation, small trauma and quick postoperative recovery.

FullText(HTML)

References (18)

References

[1]	李杰文, 何显荣, 陆健辉. 脑梗死和脑出血急性期患者凝血和血脂的差异[J]. 华夏医学, 2018, 31(1): 36-38.
[2]	沈蓉, 周华, 孙逸琼, 等. 脑梗死和脑出血患者凝血和血小板状态的研究[J]. 世界最新医学信息文摘, 2018, 18(A0): 171-172. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-WMIA2018A0130.htm
[3]	陈志刚, 夏红建, 艾桂莲, 等. 高血压脑出血术后再出血的原因分析[J]. 基层医学论坛, 2018, 22(32): 4503-4505. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXLT201832003.htm
[4]	王小林, 降建新, 鲁峻. 高血压脑出血手术治疗近期预后的疗效观察[J]. 临床医药文献电子杂志, 2019, 6(60): 54-55. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCWX201960036.htm
[5]	杨雪, 潘金玉, 魏利, 等. 高血压脑出血术后再出血相关危险因素分析[J]. 局解手术学杂志, 2018, 27(10): 711-714. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JJXZ201810005.htm
[6]	吴波涛, 温安延, 徐学斌, 等. 脑室镜辅助与常规开颅手术治疗中等量高血压脑出血近期疗效及中期预后分析[J]. 实用医院临床杂志, 2018, 15(1): 63-66. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6170.2018.01.020
[7]	陈同, 赖永东, 陈庚铭. 老年高血压脑出血保守治疗患者再出血发生危险因素分析[J]. 锦州医科大学学报, 2018, 39(4): 52-54. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JZYX201804016.htm
[8]	仝兆锋, 皇甫蓓蓓. 微创穿刺血肿引流术与小骨窗血肿清除术治疗高血压性脑出血的效果比较及再出血影响因素分析[J]. 中国当代医药, 2018, 25(31): 15-17. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-4721.2018.31.006
[9]	石晓卉, 刘艳, 肖东. 高血压脑出血术后不同目标值收缩压对血肿体积及神经损伤的影响研究[J]. 中国医学前沿杂志: 电子版, 2016, 8(10): 99-104. doi: 10.12037/YXQY.2016.10-25
[10]	任娟. 对脑出血患者进行凝血功能检查在评估其预后方面的价值[J]. 当代医药论丛, 2018, 16(15): 76-77. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-7629.2018.15.054
[11]	何玺君, 李慧勇, 彭余江, 等. 口服抗血小板药物并发脑出血的急诊手术治疗[J]. 浙江创伤外科, 2018, 23(02): 328-329. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-7147.2018.02.059
[12]	张有涛, 赵益明, 季顺东, 等. 血小板聚集功能的新检测方法和仪器的性能评价及临床应用[J]. 中国实验血液学杂志, 2013, 21(3): 674-677. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XYSY201303031.htm
[13]	颜永强, 洪伟. 单纯颅脑损伤病人凝血功能异常的相关因素[J]. 中国临床神经外科杂志, 2018, 23(03): 168-169, 172. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGLC201803010.htm
[14]	郭旭, 赵红宇, 孙佩欣, 等. 单纯颅脑损伤病人凝血功能异常的危险因素[J]. 中国临床神经外科杂志, 2019, 24(7): 410-412. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGLC201907010.htm
[15]	吕学文, 杨永康, 张小雷, 等. 创伤性颅脑损伤患者凝血功能及炎性因子的变化研究[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(3): 247-249. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCWK201903023.htm
[16]	汪双, 李家信. 微创穿刺碎吸术合并尿激酶冲洗引流在脑出血早期凝血功能异常患者中的应用观察[J]. 中国社区医师, 2019, 35(2): 64-64, 66. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-614x.2019.02.044
[17]	裴明和, 梁合, 孙捷, 等. 不同外科治疗方案治疗老年高血压脑出血患者的疗效比较[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2018, 38(22): 5478-5480. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9202.2018.22.042
[18]	刘斌, 陈谦学. 微创穿刺碎吸术合并尿激酶冲洗引流在脑出血早期凝血功能异常患者中的应用观察[J]. 宁夏医科大学学报, 2017, 39(8): 946-949. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNXY201708030.htm

Cited By

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (243) PDF downloads (3)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Removal and drainage of hematoma by small bone window craniotomy versus minimally invasive puncture and aspiration in treatment of cerebral hemorrhage patients with coagulation disorders in early stage

Abstract

References

Catalog

Export File

Citation

Format

Content