Comparison Of Minimally Invasive And Pharmacological Effects Of Moderate-volume Hypertensive Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Objective: To study the treatment method and the effect of the operation time of the patients with cerebral hemorrhage,and to determine the treatment method and the time of treatment.Methods: 324 cases of cerebral hemorrhage in our hospital from 2012 to 2011 were retrospectively analyzed.Male 198 cases,female 126 cases.Between the ages of 55 and 65,the average age(61 + 3.8),all patients who participated in the study were equally divided into 2 groups,minimally invasive and conservative groups.The minimally invasive group were treated with minimally invasive hematoma removal of soft passage,conservative group were treated with conventional therapy.1 weeks,2 weeks,4 weeks,weeks after treatment,two groups were treated with GCS coma index and NIHSS score and analysis.Two weeks after operation,fourth groups of patients were treated by living activitiesdaily(ADL)score,and the complications were compared between the two groups.The recovery status and complications of patients with different surgical procedures were summarized.The average hospitalization expenses of two groups were summarized,and the comparison was made.Results: 1.One week after treatment,the average GCS score of the two groups was no significant difference(P>0.05),but the GCS score of the two groups after 2 weeks of treatment with significant difference(P<0.05).2.Two groups of patients after treatment for one week after the NIHSS neurological function score was significantly different(P<0.05).And with the increase of the time of treatment,two groups of patients with neurological function score of the greater.3.Major complications included hemorrhage of digestive tract,pulmonary infection,intracranial infection,renal failure,heart failure and intracranial hemorrhage after treatment.The total incidence rate of complications was 29.53%,and the total complication rate was 22.22%.After statistical analysis,Intracranial infection incidence of minimally invasive group was obviously higher than conservative group,with statistical differences(P<0.05),But there were no significant differences in the incidence of complications between the two groups(P>0.05).4.The recovery of patients in the 4 groups were significantly different(p<0.05),that is,the recovery of patients in minimally invasive group was significantly better than that of the conservative group,mortality was significantly lower than that of the conservative group.5.The recovery rate of patients was not significantly different(P>0.05),and the recovery rate was not significantly different(P<0.05).6.There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications(P>0.05)in the early,early and delayed treatment.7.The total cost of patients in the two groups,drug and hospitalization time there were statistically significant differences(P < 0.05),but two groups of patients with treatment costs does not exist significant difference(P > 0.05).Conclusion: Minimally invasive treatment of GCS score significantly better than conservative treatment.After 4 weeks of treatment,neurological score was significantly better than conservative treatment.Minimally invasive treatment of patients with rehabilitation is also better than conservative treatment of patients.And the incidence of complications is also known as conservative treatment of patients with light.And from the perspective of economic blood analysis,minimally invasive treatment is also significantly stronger than conservative treatment,so the same amount of cerebral hemorrhage patients should choose minimally invasive hematoma removal surgery.