摘要:目的:探讨慢性硬膜下血肿(chronic subdural hematoma, CSDH)钻孔冲洗引流术后的复发因素。方法：回顾性分析165例CSDH钻孔冲洗+闭式引流术的治疗效果,并结合患者年龄、术后引流量、血肿腔是否有间隔、血肿厚度、引流管安放方向等因素进行相关分析。结果:本组治愈151例,血肿复发14例。〖HTH〗结论〖HTSS〗:患者年龄、术后引流量、血肿腔是否有间隔、血肿厚度、引流管安放方向是影响复发的主要因素。Abstract: Objective: To explore the related factors of recurrence of chronic subdural hematoma after burr hole drainage.Methods:The related aspects that affected the recurrence in 165 cases with chronic subdural hematomas after burr hole drainage were reviewed,and patient’s age,drainage volume,thickness of hematoma, septal hematoma cavity and direction of drain pipe were evaluated.Results:Clinical outcomes were satisfactory.151 patients completely recovered after burr hole drainage,there were 14 patients with hematoma recurrence. Conclusion : Age, drainage volume, thickness of hematoma, septal hematoma cavity and direction of drain pipe would affect the prognosis.
目的:探讨外伤性硬膜下积液的治疗经验。方法:对 46例外伤性硬膜下积液患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果:非手术治疗20例。手术治疗30例次，其中腰蛛网膜下腔置管持续引流脑脊液5例，钻孔外引流19例，骨窗开颅蛛网膜撕口4例，积液腔腹腔分流2例。结论:对外伤性硬膜下积液患者，应采取个性化的综合治疗方法。
ObjectiveTo review the diagnosis, clinical characteristics and treatment of Arachnoid cyst rupture associated with epilepsy. MethodsThe clinical data of one patient with arachnoid cyst rupture associated with epilepsy was reported and diagnosis, clinical characteristics, the treatment options were discussed with literature reviewed. ResultsWe arranged the operation:arachnoid cyst resection and the left anterior temporal lobe resection and colostomy, the patient recovered well postoperatively, without special discomfort, epilepsy did not attack again. ConclusionsArachnoid cyst rupture associated with epilepsy is extremely rare, postoperative effect is good through strict preoperative assessment.
ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the value of SEEG and subdural cortical electrodes monitoring in preoperative evaluation of epileptogenic zone. MethodsFeatures of patients using SEEG (48 cases) and subdural cortical electrodes monitoring (52 cases) to evaluate the epileptogenic zone were collected from June 2011 to June 2015. And the evaluation results, surgical effects and complications were compared. ResultsThere was no significant difference between SEEG and subdural cortical electrodes monitoring in identifying the epileptogenic zone or taking epileptic surgery, but SEEG could monitor multifocal and bilateral epileptogenic zone. And there was no significant difference in postoperative seizure control and intelligence improvement (P > 0.05). The total complication rate of SEEG was lower than subdural cortical electrodes monitoring, especially in hemorrhage and infection (P < 0.05). ConclusionsThere was no difference among SEEG and subdural cortical electrodes monitoring in surgical results, but SEEG with less hemorrhagic and infectious risks. SEEG is a safe and effective intracranial monitoring method, which can be widely used.
目的:改良钻孔引流术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿27例,提高临床治疗效果。方法:术中可控下持续生理盐水冲洗后,加入尼莫地平注射液排空,术后低渗或等渗液体维持脑灌注压。结果:27例慢性硬膜下血肿经上述措施处理后,经随访均达到满意临床治疗效果。结论:慢性硬膜下血肿钻孔引流术中加用尼莫地平注射液冲洗、排气,及规范化术后处理措施可提高临床疗效。
ObjectiveTo explore the advantages and disadvantages of using two intracranial EEG (iEEG) monitoring methods—Subdural ectrodes electroencephalography (SDEG)and Stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG), in patients with “difficult to locate” Intractable Epilepsy. MethodsRetrospectively analyzed the data of 60 patients with SDEG monitoring (49 cases) and SEEG monitoring (11 cases) from January 2010 to December 2018 in the Department of Neurosurgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical. Observe and statistically compare the differences in the evaluation results of epileptic zones, surgical efficacy and related complications of the two groups of patients, and review the relevant literature. ResultsThe results showed that the two groups of SDEG and SEEG had no significant difference in the positive rate and surgical resection rate of epileptogenic zones, but the bilateral implantation rate of SEEG (5/11, 45.5%) was higher than that of SDEG (18/49, 36.7%). At present, there was no significant difference in the postoperative outcome among patients with epileptic zones resected after SDEG and SEEG monitoring (P>0.05). However, due to the limitation of the number of SEEG cases, it is not yet possible to conclude that the two effects were the same. There was a statistically significant difference in the total incidence of serious complications of bleeding or infection between the two groups (SDEG 20 cases vs. SEEG 1 case, P<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the total incidence of significant headache or cerebral edema between the two groups (SDEG 26 cases vs. SEEG 2 cases, P<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of cerebrospinal fluid leakage, subcutaneous fluid incision, and poor healing of incision after epileptic resection (SDEG 14 cases vs. SEEG 0 case, P<0.05); there were no significant differences in dysfunction of speech, muscle strength between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionSEEG has fewer complications than SDEG, SEEG is safer than SDEG. The two kinds of iEEG monitoring methods have advantages in the localization of epileptogenic zones and the differentiation of functional areas. The effective combination of the two methods in the future may be more conducive to the location of epileptic zones and functional areas.