时间:2024-07-28
魏中兴
[摘要] 目的 探討手术治疗时机的选择对于重症高血压脑出血病症的临床治疗效果。方法 方便选取2016年1月—2018年1月间来院接受治疗的高血压脑出血患者作为研究对象,梳理分析病例资料,挑选出符合试验要求的60例纳入试验研究序列,根据患者从发病至接受手术的时间间隔长短进行分组,将从发病至接受手术的时间间隔为6~24 h的患者分为早期组,共30例;将间隔时间小于6 h的患者作为超早期组,共30例。两组受试个体均行去骨瓣减压加血肿清除术治疗,对比分析临床疗效的组间差异性。 结果 治疗3周后,超早期组的治疗总有效率高达96.67%,明显高于早期组的73.33%(t=4.707,P<0.05);超早期组在接受为期1个月的治疗后意识恢复率高达93.33%,明显高于早期组的66.67%,超早期组致残率为6.67%,明显低于早期组的33.33%,组间差异有统计学意义(t=6.668,P<0.05);超早期组在进行为期3个月的治疗后,患者伤残情况、运动功能及神经功能缺损评分分别为(73.61±6.82)分、(68.89±11.96)分、(86.44±16.19)分,均明显优于早期组的(68.93±4.96)分、(62.93±9.87)分、(72.83±15.62)分,组间差异有统计学意义(t=3.040,2.105,3.314,P<0.05);在并发症发生率方面,超早期组为16.67%,明显低于早期组的43.33%,组间差异有统计学意义(t=5.078,P<0.05)。结论 超早期手术可有效提升高血压脑出血患者的临床治疗效果,不仅有效改善了患者伤残情况、运动功能及神经功能缺损情况,而且对于并发症也起到了显著的控制作用,具有较好的临床推广应用价值。
[关键词] 高血压脑出血;超早期手术;临床疗效
[中图分类号] R5 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742(2019)02(c)-0091-03
[Abstract] Objective To explore the clinical treatment effect of the timing of surgical treatment for severe hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. Methods Patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage who were treated in the hospital from January 2016 to January 2018 were convenient selected as subjects for the study. The patient data were analyzed and selected, and 60 patients who met the test requirements were selected for inclusion in the trial study sequence. The time interval between the operation and the operation was divided into groups. The patients from the onset to the time of surgery were 6~24 h, and the patients were divided into the early group, a total of 30 cases. The patients with the interval of less than 6h were used as the ultra-early group, a total of 30 cases. All the subjects in the two groups underwent decompressive craniectomy plus hematoma evacuation, and the differences between the clinical effects were compared. Results After 3 weeks of treatment, the total effective rate of the ultra-early group was as high as 96.67%, which was significantly higher than that of the early group 73.33%(t=4.707, P<0.05). The ultra-early group received consciousness after 1 month of treatment. The recovery rate was as high as 93.33%, which was significantly higher than that of the early group (66.67%). The morbidity rate of the ultra-early group was 6.67%, which was significantly lower than that of the early group (33.33%). The difference between the groups was significant (t=6.668, P<0.05). In the early group, after 3 months of treatment, the patients' disability, motor function and neurological deficit scores were (73.61±6.82)points, (68.89±11.96)points, and (86.44±16.19)points, respectively better than the early group (68.93±4.96)points, (62.93±9.87)points, (72.83±15.62)points, the differences between the groups were significant (t=3.040, 2.105, 3.314, P<0.05); In terms of the incidence of symptoms, the ultra-early group was 16.67%, which was significantly lower than the 43.33% in the early group, and the difference between the groups was significant(t=5.078, P<0.05). Conclusion Ultra-early surgery can effectively improve the clinical treatment effect of patients with hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage, not only effectively improve the patient's disability, motor function and neurological deficit, but also play a significant role in controlling the complications. The value of clinical promotion and application.
[Key words] Hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage; Ultra-early surgery; Clinical efficacy
高血压脑出血是临床较为常见的脑血管病症,该病发病危急,若不能得到及时有效的治疗,将危及患者生命[1]。有研究指出[2],高血压是诱发脑出血的直接因素,临床致残率较高。目前临床上多通过去骨瓣减压加血肿清除术清除患者颅内血肿,该种术式对于促进患者神经功能的恢复具有重要作用。近年来,有学者指出手术时机的把握对于患者预后结局将产生重大影响,超早期手术对于恢复患者神经功能具有积 [3]。该次研究方便选取2016年1月—2018年1月间的60例患者进行研究,现报道如下。
1 资料与方法
1.1 一般资料
方便选取来院接受治疗的60例高血压脑出血患者研究对象,随机分为早期组、超早期组,均行去骨瓣减压加血肿清除术治疗。术前所有受试个体均经伦理委员会批准,并征得家属许可。基线资料组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。见表1。
1.2 方法
麻醉处理后均接受头颅CT检查,明确病灶部位,根据需去除骨瓣的大小进行手术设计,对切口部位、形状进行选择并划线标记。对患者头颅消毒,进行全麻,沿标记切开头皮,对颅骨进行钻孔,去除骨瓣,将穿刺针置入脑室进行穿刺引导,将引流管固定后对血肿进行引流,血肿清除后通过显微镜检查残留情况,残留物清除完毕后进行止血处理,并用0.9%氯化钠注射液对血肿部位进行冲洗,引流后关闭颅骨[4]。
1.3 观察指标
术后神经功能评分降幅高于90%,可视为完全恢复,视为痊愈;得分降幅低于50%~90%,视为治疗后有显著进步;评分降幅15%~50%,视为术后有进步;神经功能评分降幅低于15%,视为治疗无效[5]。患者意识恢复的评价遵照GCS评分标准,得分<8分视为处于昏迷状态,采用ESS积分法对患者的神经功能缺损情况进行评价,伤残情况评价采用Barthel指数法,总分为100分,<75分为伤残,采用运动功能评分法(FMA)对运动功能进行评价,总分为100分,得分高视为运动功能好[6]。
1.4 统计方法
应用SPSS 17.0统计学软件数据处理,计量资料用(x±s)表示,行t检验,计数资料用[n(%)]表示,行χ2检验,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。
2 结果
2.1 患者临床疗效比较
在治疗总有效率方面,经过为期3周的治疗后超早期组高达96.67% ,明显高于早期组的73.33%(P<0.05),见表2。
2.2 意识恢复及致残率比较
超早期组意识恢复率为93.33%,明显高于早期组的33.33%(P<0.05),致残率则明显低于早期组的6.67%(P<0.05)。見表3。
2.3 BI、FMA、ESS 评分组间比较
治疗后3个月,在BI、FMA及ESS评分方面,超早期组均高于早期组(P<0.05) 。见表4。
2.4 并发症发生情况
在并发症发生率方面,超早期组为16.67%,明显低于早期组的43.33% (P<0.05)。见表5。
3 讨论
高血压患者往往在受到异常因素的影响下容易诱发脑出血,该病发病急切,一旦出现脑出血症状需要及时进行救治,否则将给预后结局造成不利影响,临床上具有较高的致残率,甚至将危及患者生命[7-8]。目前临床上在手术的时机选择上却存在较大的分歧,临床认为在患者发病后第一时间接受手术具有重要作用[9]。去骨瓣减压治疗可有效缓解颅内压力,对于改善颅内水肿及神经功能具有积极作用,逐步在脑血管病症的治疗中得到了应用[10]。
有研究指出,去骨瓣减压加血肿清除术能够减少血肿在颅内的留存时间,对于缓解颅内压力,降低毒性物质的产生具有积极意义。该次研究结果显示,超早期组的治疗总有效率高达96.67%,明显高于早期组的73.33%(t=4.707,P<0.05),这与周国林[8]的研究结果(超早期组的治疗总有效率96.59%,早期组为73.40%)较为一致;超早期组的意识恢复率为93.33%,明显高于早期组的66.67%,超早期组致残率为6.67%,明显低于早期组的33.33%,组间差异有统计学意义(t=6.668,P<0.05),这与刘宏浩[3]的研究结果(超早期组的意识恢复率、致残率分别为93.41%、6.67%,早期组分别为66.53%、33.41%)较为一致。造成这种结果的原因可能是超早期手术缩短了血肿的存留时间,缓解了毒性物质对脑神经的损伤作用,缩短了患者意识恢复时间和并发症发生率。而早期手术则由于血肿存留时间长,对脑组织造成了较大范围的损伤。
综上所述,在手术的时机选择方面,超早期手术可有效提升高血压脑出血患者的临床治疗效果,促进了患者病情转归,降低了并发症发生率,具有较好的临床推广应用价值。
[参考文献]
[1] 张俊.高血压脑出血患者不同手术时机治疗与术后发生再出血及近期疗效的关系研究[J].中华全科医学,2015(4):551-553.
[2] 周长元.不同手术时机治疗高血压脑出血与术后再出血相关性研究[J].河北医学,2015(7):1132-1134.
[3] 刘宏浩.不同手术时机治疗高血压脑出血的对比分析研究[J]. 重庆医学,2016,45(22):2925-2927.
[4] 吕钊.超早期手术结合增液承气汤加减方治疗高血压脑出血临床疗效观察[J].解放军医药杂志,2017(6):78-82.
[5] 褚光.超早期与早期小骨窗手术治疗高血压脑出血的临床比较[J].中华全科医学,2016(5):735-736.
[6] 胡振宇.老年高血压脑出血患者超早期手术治疗的临床疗效[J].医学综述,2017,23(5):1030-1033.
[7] 刘清流.不同手术时机治疗高血压脑出血与术后再出血相关性分析[J].医学理论与实践,2017,30(21):3172-3173.
[8] 周国林.超早期手术与早期手术对高血压脑出血患者的疗效分析[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2015,16(19):57-58.
9] Noriyuki.Dysautoregulation in patients with hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage. A SPECT study[J].Neurosurgical Review,2015,18(4):23-26.
[10] Zhi Wang,Chao. Changes of TXA 2 and PGI 2 during postoperative hypertensive crisis in patients with hypert-ensive intracerebral hemorrhage[J].Journal of Huazh- ong University of Science and Technology[Medical Sciences],2016,28(1):52-58.
(收稿日期:2018-11-23)
我们致力于保护作者版权,注重分享,被刊用文章因无法核实真实出处,未能及时与作者取得联系,或有版权异议的,请联系管理员,我们会立即处理! 部分文章是来自各大过期杂志,内容仅供学习参考,不准确地方联系删除处理!