目的 比较颅内动脉瘤显微外科手术与血管内介入治疗的疗效。方法 回顾性分析颅内动脉瘤行血管内介入和显微手术治疗各54例患者资料,比较两组术后恢复良好率、GOS评分、并发症发生率、平均住院时间。结果 根据GOS评分,介入治疗组术后恢复良好、轻残、重残、植物生存、死亡分别为41例、6例、4例、2例、1例,而显微手术组分别为39例、8例、5例、1例、1例。介入治疗组、显微手术组的并发症分别为5例(9.26%)、6例(占11.1%),平均住院时间分别为(8.2±0.9)d、(8.3±1.0)d。两组术后恢复良好率、GOS评分、并发症发生率、平均住院时间比较,差异均无统计学意义。结论 血管内介入与显微手术治疗颅内动脉瘤疗效无明显差异,应根据不同病情选择更有效的治疗方法。

Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of microsurgery and intravascular interventional therapy for treating intracranial aneurysms. Methods The clinical data of 54 patients with intracranial aneurysms by intravascular interventional therapy and 54 such patients by microsurgery treatment were retrospectively analyzed. The clinical curative effect was analyzed according to the classification of Hunt-Hess of hospitalized patients and the GOS scores of patients discharged from hospital, and the complication rates and the average hospitalization time of two methods were compared. Results According to GOS score, patients being in good recovery, mild disability, severe disability, vegetable survival, and death were 41 cases, 6 cases, 4 cases, 2 cases and one case, respectively, in the interventional therapy group, and were 39 cases, 8 cases, 5 cases, one case and one case respectively,in the microsurgery group. Five cases (9.26%) had complications in the interventional therapy group, and 6 cases (11.1%) in the microsurgery group. The average hospitalization time was (8.2?0.9) d and (8.3?1.0) d respectively, in the interventional therapy group and in the microsurgery group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the rate of good recovery, the GOS scores, the incidence of complications and the average hospitalization time. Conclusions Interventional therapy and microsurgery are the effective treatments for intracranial aneurysms, and there is no significant difference between the two methods. But we should take more effective methods according to different disease condition of patients.