摘要
目的:探讨标准外伤大骨瓣开颅术与常规骨瓣开颅术治疗重型颅脑损伤的临床疗效。方法:收集我院2011年1月到2015年1月收治的重型颅脑损伤患者80例,按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组40例,患者术前均给予常规护理,观察组给予标准外伤大骨瓣开颅术,对照组给予常规骨瓣开颅术,采用格拉斯哥预后评分(GOS)法评价两组术后12个月疗效,比较两组术前和术后7 d患者颅内压变化,记录两组患者并发症发生情况。结果:观察组疗效、良好率、存活率均显著高于对照组(P<0.05)。治疗后7 d两组颅内压差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),并且两组术后7d与治疗前相比差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组脑切口疝发生率为2.5%,明显低于对照组的20.0%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:标准外伤大骨瓣开颅术治疗效果优于常规骨瓣开颅术,具有一定安全性,值得临床推荐。
Objective： To evaluate the clinical efficacy of standard large trauma craniotomy and routine craniotomy on patients with severe brain injury. Methods： 80 patients of severe brain injury were collected from January 2011 to January 2015 in neurosurgery of our hospital, which was divided into observer group and control group, 40 cases in each group, and former surgery patients were given conventional treatment, observation group received standard large trauma craniotomy, control group received routine craniotomy, the effect of 12 groups were evaluated by Glasgow outcome score （GOS）, and the changes of intracranial pressure in two groups before and after operation were compared between the two groups,and the complications of the two groups were recorded. Results： The curative effect, good rate and survival rate of the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group （P〈0.05）; There were significant differences in intracranial pressure between the two groups after 7d treatment （P〈0.05）, and also statistically significant between postoperative 7 d and before treatment （P〈0.05）; The incidence of cerebral hernia in the observation group was 2.5%, significantly lower than the 20% in control group, the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. Conclusion： The standard large trauma craniotomy effective than conventional craniotomy, has certain security, worthy of recommendation.
出处
《现代生物医学进展》
CAS
2016年第16期3122-3124,共3页
Progress in Modern Biomedicine
