Comparison Of Clinical Efficacy Of Endoscopic And Microsurgical Treatment Of Hypertensive Cerebral Hemorrhage In Basal Ganglia Region

Objective: In this study,intraoperative information of patients,postoperative complications and prognosis of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage in basal ganglia region were compared by microsurgery and endoscopic surgery,in order to find the best clinical treatment method for hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage.Materials and methods: Research adopted retrospective analysis methods to analyze the people's hospital of wuxi xishan and second affiliated hospital of suzhou university hospital from January 2011 to January 2016,80 cases of basal ganglia region by surgery in patients with hypertension cerebral hemorrhage patients clinical data yuan way divided into divided into endoscopic group(35 cases)and microscopic surgery group(45 cases)analysis and comparison of two sets of operation operation time,intraoperative blood loss,preoperative and postoperative Glasgow coma scale(GCS)score improvement,calculate the operation time,intraoperative bleeding volume,hemostasis time,the hematoma clearance rate,and complications,using m RS score evaluation of prognosis after 6 months,the data statistical analysis,P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results: There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two groups(p > 0.05).The operation time of the two groups was significantly lower(46.57 + 9.78min)than that of the microsurgery group(121.45 + 45.32 min,P <.001).Intraoperative blood loss(66.20 + 16.78ml)was significantly lower in the endoscopic group than in the microscopic surgery group(131.54 + 67.34ml),and there were significant differences in intraoperative blood loss between the two groups(P <.001).The hemostatic time of the endoscopy group was(22.34 + 7.56)min,significantly lower than that of the microsurgery group(30.34 + 10.31 min,P <.001).The overall GCS score of the two groups after surgery was improved compared with that before surgery,the endoscopic group was improved by 1.56 + /-1.23 points,and the microscopic surgery group was improved by 1.12 + /-0.46 points.Postoperative GCS scores of the two groups were significantly different,with statistical significance(P<.001).There were 10 cases of intracranial infection after microsurgery,and 6 cases of intracranial infection after endoscopy.The infection rate of the microsurgery group was higher than that of the endoscopy group,and the difference was statistically significant(P=0.030).There were 20 cases of pulmonary infection in the postoperative microsurgery group and 10 cases of pulmonary infection in the endoscopic group,and the pulmonary infection rate in the endoscopic group was the lowest,showing a statistical difference(P=0.023).There were 6 cases of postoperative rebleeding in the microsurgery group and 3 cases in the endoscopy group.The rebleeding rate in the microsurgery group was significantly higher than that in the endoscopy group,with a statistically significant difference(P=.023).There were 9 deaths in the microscopic group and 3 deaths in the endoscopic group,which was statistically significant(P=.027).After 6 months,m RS in the microsurgery group(3.10 + 1.03)and the endoscopy group(3.96 + 1.66)were better than those in the microsurgery group(P=0.013).Conclusion: There were significant differences in intraoperative information and postoperative complications,the indexs of endoscopy group were better than those of microsurgery group,and the removal rate of hematoma by neuroendoscope was significantly improved.The outcome of endoscopic surgery group was better than that of microsurgical surgery group.