楊娜 李繼華 李壬子
[摘要]目的 比較動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)與彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞術(shù)治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的效果。方法 選取2016年9月~2018年2月于我院接受治療的110例高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血患者,按照隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法將患者分為對(duì)照組和觀察組,各55例。兩組患者均接受常規(guī)蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血治療,在此基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)照組患者采取動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)治療,觀察組患者采取彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞治療。治療3個(gè)月后,記錄、比較兩組患者的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生情況,利用格拉斯哥預(yù)后量表(GOS)評(píng)價(jià)兩組患者的療效和預(yù)后效果。結(jié)果 觀察組患者的預(yù)后良好率為54.55%,高于對(duì)照組的38.18%,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05);兩組患者治療前的GOS評(píng)分比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),治療后,兩組患者的GOS評(píng)分均下降,且觀察組評(píng)分低于對(duì)照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。兩組的并發(fā)癥主要有再出血、腦積水和腦血管痙攣,觀察組患者的并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率為16.36%,明顯低于對(duì)照組的30.93%,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。結(jié)論 動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)和彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血均能取得一定的治療效果,但彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞治療后的并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率更低,具有較高的安全性,療效更好。
[關(guān)鍵詞]高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血;栓塞手術(shù);夾閉手術(shù)
[中圖分類(lèi)號(hào)] R743.35? ? ? ? ? [文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼] A? ? ? ? ? [文章編號(hào)] 1674-4721(2019)6(a)-0041-03
[Abstract] Objective To compare the effect of aneurysm clipping and endovascular embolization of coil tumors operation in the treatment of high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Methods A total of 110 patients with high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage treated in our hospital from September 2016 to February 2018 were selected and they were divided into the control group and the observation group according to the random digital table method, there were 55 cases in each group. The two groups were given with conventional subarachnoid hemorrhage treatment. On this basis, patients in the control group were treated by the aneurysm clipping operation, while patients in the observation group were treated by the endovascular embolization of coil tumors operation. After 3 months of treatment, the incidence of complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. The Glasgow prognosis scale (GOS) was used to evaluate the efficacy and prognosis of the two groups. Results The good prognosis rate of the observation group was 54.55%, which was higher than that of the control group (38.18%), and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in GOS score between the two groups before treatment (P>0.05), after treatment, the GOS scores of both groups decreased, and the scores of observation group were lower than those of control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The main complications of the two groups were rebleeding, hydrocephalus and cerebral vasospasm. The total incidence of complications in the observation group was 16.36%, which was significantly lower than that in the control group (30.93%), and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion Aneurysm clipping and endovascular embolization of coil tumors operation in the treatment of high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage can achieve certain therapeutic effect, but the total incidence of complications after endovascular embolization of coil tumors operation is lower, with higher safety and better curative effect.
[Key words] High grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage; Embolization operation; Clipping operation
動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血是由動(dòng)脈瘤破裂導(dǎo)致的一種嚴(yán)重病變,由于患者腦部血管構(gòu)造復(fù)雜,血管破裂后不容易止血,出血進(jìn)入蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔引發(fā)顱內(nèi)高壓和腦膜刺激征,嚴(yán)重者會(huì)危及患者生命[1-2]。因此,及時(shí)處理破裂的動(dòng)脈瘤是治療動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的關(guān)鍵。動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)和彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞術(shù)均能對(duì)破裂的顱內(nèi)動(dòng)脈瘤進(jìn)行有效止血,是臨床上最常用的外科治療方法[3]。本研究旨在比較動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)與彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞術(shù)治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的效果,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1 資料與方法
1.1一般資料
選取2016年9月~2018年2月于開(kāi)灤總醫(yī)院院接受治療的110例高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血患者為研究對(duì)象,按照隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法將患者分為對(duì)照組和觀察組,各55例。110例患者年齡35~65歲,平均(48.2±4.7)歲;男60例,女50例。對(duì)照組中,男32例,女 23例;平均年齡(48.5±6.3)歲;世界神經(jīng)外科醫(yī)師聰明(WFNS)分級(jí) Ⅳ級(jí)35例,Ⅴ級(jí)20例。觀察組中,男28例,女27例;平均年齡(47.5±8.3)歲;WFNS分級(jí) Ⅳ級(jí)30例,Ⅴ級(jí)25例。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①所有患者WFNS分級(jí)均屬于Ⅳ~Ⅴ級(jí)[4];②患者經(jīng)CT診斷確診為動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①?zèng)]有能力配合手術(shù)治療的患者;②存在嚴(yán)重臟器疾病史的患者;③未確診為動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血,顱內(nèi)動(dòng)脈瘤診斷結(jié)果不明確的患者;④患有其他嚴(yán)重系統(tǒng)疾病,患者的預(yù)期生存時(shí)間小于半年。本研究已經(jīng)院醫(yī)院醫(yī)學(xué)倫理委員會(huì)審核同意?;颊呒捌浼覍倬炇鹬橥鈺?shū)。
1.2方法
對(duì)觀察組患者進(jìn)行彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞手術(shù)治療?;颊呷砺樽恚紫雀鶕?jù)造影結(jié)果判斷患者的動(dòng)脈瘤大小,后將微導(dǎo)管導(dǎo)入動(dòng)脈瘤,整個(gè)過(guò)程在造影結(jié)果指導(dǎo)下進(jìn)行,以防止瘤體或者血管壁在置入導(dǎo)管的過(guò)程中被刺破。再次在造影結(jié)果的指導(dǎo)下確認(rèn)動(dòng)脈瘤的情況且明確微型導(dǎo)管所處位置,后將尺寸適中的彈簧圈精準(zhǔn)置入預(yù)計(jì)位置,同時(shí)將解脫裝置的正極和負(fù)極分別與彈簧圈金屬裸露處和經(jīng)皮穿刺鋼針連接,適當(dāng)調(diào)整電流和電壓[5]。患者術(shù)后接受穿刺位置壓迫治療,同時(shí)接受抗凝血治療。
對(duì)照組患者接受動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉手術(shù)治療。患者全身麻醉,首先根據(jù)超聲檢查結(jié)果判斷患者的動(dòng)脈瘤情況,根據(jù)動(dòng)脈瘤位置選擇手術(shù)入路,去除手術(shù)入路處的皮瓣和骨瓣,通過(guò)顯微鏡觀察并確定腦血管解剖位置,同時(shí)分離瘤頸[6],謹(jǐn)慎選擇動(dòng)脈瘤夾的位置然后將其夾閉。患者術(shù)后接受抗感染藥物治療。
1.3評(píng)價(jià)指標(biāo)
觀察記錄兩組患者的臨床療效,并記錄兩組患者的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生情況,比較兩組患者的并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率。兩組患者療3個(gè)月后,利用格拉斯哥預(yù)后量表(Glasgow outcome scale,GOS)評(píng)價(jià)兩組患者的治療效果[7]。評(píng)價(jià)分級(jí)如下:僅能夠進(jìn)行呼吸等簡(jiǎn)單動(dòng)作,不能進(jìn)行有意識(shí)的反應(yīng),為植物生存;可以進(jìn)行自主活動(dòng)但是喪失部分工作能力,為中度殘疾;不存在自主生活能力,患者有嚴(yán)重的語(yǔ)言的知覺(jué)障礙,有簡(jiǎn)單意識(shí),為重度殘疾;患者的疾病癥狀表現(xiàn)較輕,基本能夠順利進(jìn)行日常生活,為恢復(fù)良好。預(yù)后良好=恢復(fù)良好+中度殘疾。GOS評(píng)分與患者的預(yù)后成負(fù)相關(guān),評(píng)分越低,患者的預(yù)后越好。
1.4統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法
采用統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)軟件SPSS 22.0分析數(shù)據(jù),計(jì)量資料以均數(shù)±標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差(x±s)表示,采用t檢驗(yàn);計(jì)數(shù)資料以率表示,采用χ2檢驗(yàn),以P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2 結(jié)果
2.1兩組患者預(yù)后良好率的比較
觀察組患者的預(yù)后良好率為54.55%,高于對(duì)照組的38.18%,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)(表1)。
2.2 兩組患者治療前后GOS評(píng)分的比較
兩組患者治療前的GOS評(píng)分比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),治療后,兩組患者的GOS評(píng)分均下降,且觀察組評(píng)分低于對(duì)照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)(表2)。
2.3兩組患者并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率的比較
觀察組患者的并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率為16.36%,明顯低于對(duì)照組的30.93%,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)(表3)。
3討論
動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血發(fā)病兇險(xiǎn),院前死亡率較高。流行病學(xué)研究顯示,動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔的病死率為27%~44%;一項(xiàng)基于醫(yī)院的前瞻性多中心研究結(jié)果顯示,中國(guó)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔患者發(fā)病后28 d、3、6、12個(gè)月的累計(jì)病死率率分別為16.9%、21.2%、23.6%、24.6%。早期治療和并發(fā)癥的積極防治均可改善患者的臨床預(yù)后[8-10]。
動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血主要是由動(dòng)脈瘤破裂造成的一種嚴(yán)重病變?;颊吣X部血管構(gòu)造復(fù)雜使血管破裂后的流血更加難以處理,如果出血未能及時(shí)處理,血液流入蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔,易引發(fā)腦血管痙攣等嚴(yán)重不良反應(yīng),甚至?xí)<盎颊叩纳踩?。?duì)于動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的治療,臨床上最常見(jiàn)、有效的治療方式是動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)和彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞術(shù)。動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉和彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞這兩種治療方式均能對(duì)破裂的顱內(nèi)動(dòng)脈瘤有效止血,減少并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生[11-16]。
本研究中,對(duì)照組患者采取動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)治療,觀察組患者接受彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞治療,治療3個(gè)月后,記錄比較兩組患者的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生情況,評(píng)價(jià)、對(duì)比兩組患者的療效和預(yù)后效果,按照GOS評(píng)分規(guī)則[11]對(duì)兩組患者的預(yù)后情況進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)。本研究中,觀察組的預(yù)后良好率為54.55%,高于對(duì)照組的38.18%,提示彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞治療動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的效果更好,預(yù)后效果比較理想;兩組治療后的GOS評(píng)分都有所下降,且治療后,觀察組評(píng)分低于對(duì)照組,也提示栓塞治療對(duì)患者血管的刺激和傷害更低,相較于夾閉手術(shù)治療,接受栓塞治療患者的預(yù)后更好,這與國(guó)外的觀察結(jié)果一致[17-18]。兩組術(shù)后均有數(shù)例患者發(fā)生再出血、腦積水和腦血管痙攣等并發(fā)癥,觀察組的并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率為16.36%,明顯低于對(duì)照組的30.93%。夾閉術(shù)對(duì)操作要求高,操作過(guò)程中容易損傷腦血管,增高腦血管痙攣發(fā)生率,而彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞治療能減少血管損傷的發(fā)生,有效降低術(shù)后并發(fā)癥總發(fā)生率,減少手術(shù)對(duì)患者機(jī)體免疫功能的傷害,增加治療的安全性,且能改善患者的行為功能,能提高患者治療后的生活質(zhì)量。同時(shí),彈簧圈栓塞治療通過(guò)填塞瘤囊阻斷動(dòng)脈瘤內(nèi)的血流,對(duì)動(dòng)脈瘤的進(jìn)一步治愈起到積極的推動(dòng)作用。
綜上所述,對(duì)于高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的外科治療,與動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)比較,彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞術(shù)的效果更理想,且具有較高的安全性,更有利于改善患者的預(yù)后[15]。
[參考文獻(xiàn)]
[1]鄭匡,田作富,譚顯西,等.早期治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的一年預(yù)后因素多中心研究[J].中華外科雜志,2016,54(7):534-539.
[2]宋炳偉,甄勇,何亮,等.顯微夾閉手術(shù)時(shí)機(jī)對(duì)高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血患者預(yù)后的影響[J].中國(guó)腦血管病雜志,2015,12(7):352-355,379.
[3]呼鐵民,于淼,張繼偉,等.高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血顱內(nèi)夾閉術(shù)與介入治療的近期預(yù)后對(duì)比研究[J].中國(guó)全科醫(yī)學(xué),2015,18(26):3192-3195.
[4]劉炎,杭春華,茅磊,等.高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血顱內(nèi)動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)后不同引流方式的療效及對(duì)預(yù)后的影響[J].疑難病雜志,2017,16(6):623-626.
[5]王強(qiáng),夏錫偉,邵耐遠(yuǎn),等.高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血病人早期腸內(nèi)營(yíng)養(yǎng)的臨床研究[J].腸外與腸內(nèi)營(yíng)養(yǎng),2016, 23(6):365-368.
[6]李剛,曹芳,焦松,等.彈簧圈瘤腔內(nèi)栓塞與動(dòng)脈瘤夾閉術(shù)治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的效果對(duì)比[J].中國(guó)老年學(xué)雜志,2017,37(22):5587-5589.
[7]董永軍.超早期顯微夾閉手術(shù)治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血患者的預(yù)后效果分析[J].實(shí)用心腦肺血管病雜志,2016,24(2):66-68.
[8]中國(guó)醫(yī)師協(xié)會(huì)神經(jīng)外科分會(huì)重癥專(zhuān)家委員會(huì).重癥動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血管理專(zhuān)家共識(shí)(2015)[J].中國(guó)腦血管病雜志,2015,12(4):215-226.
[9]丁璇,王志剛,王成偉,等.不同治療方式對(duì)高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血患者預(yù)后的影響[J].中華醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2012, 92(43):3054-3057.
[10]陳軍輝,王玉海,楊理坤,等.超早期手術(shù)夾閉治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血[J].國(guó)際腦血管病雜志,2015, 23(11):830-835.
[11]肖利杰,蔣敏.蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血Hunt-Hess分級(jí)和急性期并發(fā)癥與預(yù)后關(guān)系分析[J].中國(guó)實(shí)用神經(jīng)疾病雜志,2011,14(24):41-42.
[12]李?lèi)?ài)國(guó),劉之彝,龍曉東,等. 顱內(nèi)動(dòng)脈瘤介入栓塞術(shù)和顱內(nèi)夾閉術(shù)治療高分級(jí)動(dòng)脈瘤性蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔出血的臨床療效觀察[J].臨床外科雜志,2018,26(7):497-500.
[13]Mende KC,Gelderblom M,Schwarz C,et al.Somatosensory evoked potentials in patients with high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J].Neurosurg Focus,2017,43(5):17-19.
[14]Rowland MJ,Garry P,Westbrook J,et al.Acute impairment of saccadic eye movements is associated with delayed cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J].J Neurosurg,2017,127(4):754-760.
[15]Malinova V,Schatlo B,Voit M,et al.The impact of temporary clipping during aneurysm surgery on the incidence of delayed cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J].J Neurosurg. 2018,129(1):84-90.
[16]Ampie L,Choy W,Lamano JB,et al.Safety and outcomes of preoperative embolization of intracranial hemangioblastomas: a systematic review[J].Clin Neurol Neurosurg,2016, 150:143-151 .
[17]Kumar G,Shahripour RB,Harrigan MR.Vasospasm on transcranial Doppler is predictive of delayed cerebral ischemia in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].J Neurosurg,2016,124(5):1257-1264.
[18]Ogden M,Bakar B,Karagedik M,et al.Analysis of biochemical laboratory values to determine etiology and prognosis in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage:a clinical study[J].Neurol Res,2018,10:1-12.
(收稿日期:2018-12-18? 本文編輯:許俊琴)