本文關(guān)鍵詞： 可調(diào)壓分流管 腰大池腹腔分流術(shù) 腦室腹腔分流術(shù) 并發(fā)癥交通性腦積水 療效　出處：《大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：目的：回顧分析腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)及腰大池-腹腔分流術(shù)均在應(yīng)用可調(diào)壓分流管情況下,治療交通性腦積水的療效,兩種術(shù)式安全性評(píng)估,及分流術(shù)中閥門的初始分流壓力選擇。方法：2010年12月至2013年12月在大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)神經(jīng)外科手術(shù)治療的63例交通性腦積水患者,且排除腫瘤、先天性畸形、中腦導(dǎo)水管狹窄等引起的梗阻性腦積水(顱腦外傷后腦積水8例為,腦出血術(shù)后腦積水21例,顱內(nèi)占位術(shù)后腦積水4例,其他特發(fā)性腦積水30例)。臨床癥狀包括頭痛、認(rèn)知障礙、走路不穩(wěn)、小便失禁、記憶力減退、昏迷,均經(jīng)影像學(xué)檢查明確診斷腦積水。根據(jù)患者及家屬意愿行側(cè)腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)(VPS)組38例,行腰大池-腹腔分流術(shù)(LPS)組25例。均選用法國(guó)索菲薩可無(wú)創(chuàng)體外調(diào)壓分流管系統(tǒng)。術(shù)后觀察患者癥狀和影像學(xué)改善情況,根據(jù)情況再次調(diào)整壓力,最終無(wú)低顱內(nèi)壓的過(guò)度分流出現(xiàn)。分析兩組患者療效,比較兩組患者術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率差異的顯著性。計(jì)數(shù)資料采用X2檢驗(yàn),P0.05為有差異,有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。結(jié)果：術(shù)后隨訪時(shí)間3-24個(gè)月,60例患者行影像學(xué)復(fù)查均可見腦室擴(kuò)張情況減輕或消失,臨床癥狀減輕或消失,2例患者影像學(xué)復(fù)查均可見腦室擴(kuò)張情況減輕,但臨床癥狀未見改善。LPS組臨床有效20例(80%),并發(fā)癥發(fā)生4例,發(fā)生率為16%。VPS組臨床有效26例(68.4%),并發(fā)癥共13例,發(fā)生率為34.2%。LPS與VPS治療交通性腦積水總體有效率比較,術(shù)后初期LPS組因?yàn)椴l(fā)癥發(fā)生率明顯低于VPS組,有效率明顯高于VPS組,中后期有效率均略高于VPS組,但同期兩兩比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。兩組總體并發(fā)癥VPS組明顯高于LPS組,但兩者比較差別無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。VPS組6周內(nèi)并發(fā)癥為23%,而LPS組只出現(xiàn)1例,兩者比較差別有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。LPS組遠(yuǎn)期并發(fā)癥為12%,VPS組為11%,兩組同期比較,差別無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。63例患者術(shù)后共調(diào)壓82次,平均1.3次,調(diào)壓比例29例(46%),最多5次,最后壓力90-110mnH2035例(55%),最終壓力比術(shù)中腰穿測(cè)得壓力低20%48例(76%)兩組患者均未因過(guò)度分流或分流不足而出現(xiàn)并發(fā)癥。結(jié)論：采用LPS與VPS兩種術(shù)式治療交通性腦積水均達(dá)到良好療效。LPS和VPS相比,早期并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率低,有效避免腦組織穿刺引起的腦出血、腦損傷及繼發(fā)性癲癇。近端及遠(yuǎn)端均以穿刺置管,手術(shù)操作時(shí)間交短,達(dá)到了微創(chuàng)的目的,近期療效顯著。同時(shí)體外可調(diào)壓分流管的應(yīng)用,可根據(jù)患者影像學(xué)檢查情況及癥狀,術(shù)后多次無(wú)創(chuàng)調(diào)整分流管壓力,針對(duì)個(gè)體差異,達(dá)到滿意療效,并且有效避免了過(guò)度分流或分流不足的并發(fā)癥。
[Abstract]:Objective: to retrospectively analyze the efficacy and safety of ventriculoperitoneal shunt and lumbar cistern shunt in the treatment of communicating hydrocephalus. Methods: from December 2010 to December 2013, 63 patients with communicating hydrocephalus were treated by neurosurgery in Dalian Medical University. Obstructive hydrocephalus caused by stenosis of mesencephalic aqueduct (8 cases of hydrocephalus after craniocerebral trauma, 21 cases of hydrocephalus after cerebral hemorrhage, 4 cases of hydrocephalus after intracranial occupying, 30 cases of other idiopathic hydrocephalus). Cognitive impairment, unstable walking, urinary incontinence, memory loss and coma were all diagnosed by imaging examination. According to the wishes of patients and their families, 38 patients were treated with VPSs. Twenty-five patients in the LPSgroup underwent lumbar cistern and celiac shunt. All of them were treated with a non-invasive extracorporeal pressure regulating shunt system. The patients' symptoms and imaging improvement were observed after operation, and the pressure was adjusted again according to the situation. Finally, there was no excessive shunt with low intracranial pressure. The curative effect of the two groups was analyzed, and the difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups was compared. The counting data were compared by using X2 test (P0.05). Results: during the follow-up period of 3 to 24 months, all the 60 patients underwent imaging examination showed that the ventricular dilatation was alleviated or disappeared, the clinical symptoms were relieved or disappeared, and the ventricular dilatation was alleviated in 2 cases. But the clinical symptoms were not improved. In the LPS group, 20 cases were effective, 4 cases were complications, the incidence rate was 68.4% in the 16.VPS group, and 13 cases were the complications. The overall effective rate was 34.2.LPS and VPS in the treatment of communicating hydrocephalus. The incidence of complications in LPS group was significantly lower than that in VPS group, the effective rate was significantly higher in LPS group than in VPS group, and the effective rate in middle and late stage was slightly higher than that in VPS group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups in the same period. The overall complication rate in VPS group was significantly higher than that in LPS group. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups. The complications in VPS group were 23% within 6 weeks, while only one case appeared in LPS group. The long-term complications in LPS group were significantly higher than that in VPS group (n = 12, n = 11), and there was a significant difference between the two groups in the same period. The difference was not statistically significant in 63 patients (82 times, 1.3 times on average), and 29 cases (46 times, 5 times). The final pressure was 90-110mnH2035 cases, and the final pressure was 20H lower than that measured by lumbar puncture. (76 cases) neither of the two groups had complications due to excessive shunt or shunt insufficiency. Conclusion: both LPS and VPS procedures can be used to treat communicating hydrocephalus. Good efficacy. Compared with VPS, The incidence of early complications was low, and it was effective to avoid cerebral hemorrhage, brain injury and secondary epilepsy caused by puncture of brain tissue. The proximal and distal ends were inserted by puncture, the operation time was short, and the purpose of minimally invasive operation was achieved. At the same time, the application of extracorporeal adjustable pressure shunt tube can adjust the pressure of shunt tube many times after operation according to the imaging examination and symptom of the patient, aiming at the individual difference, so as to achieve satisfactory curative effect. And it effectively avoids the complications of excessive shunt or insufficient shunt.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：R651.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉志雄;張明宇;劉勁芳;萬(wàn)新;陳委;黃軍;彭澤峰;;側(cè)腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)治療交通性腦積水的臨床分析[J];中國(guó)醫(yī)師進(jìn)修雜志;2006年35期

2 肖勝輝;包陸君;;側(cè)腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)治療急性交通性腦積水療效觀察[J];中國(guó)醫(yī)藥指南;2010年10期

3 韓雪,尚清;祛水康腦散治療交通性腦積水[J];河南中醫(yī);2003年10期

4 蔡桑,蔡學(xué)見,董吉榮,陳錚立,房文峰,劉斌,時(shí)忠華;側(cè)腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)治療交通性腦積水116例報(bào)告[J];臨床神經(jīng)外科雜志;2004年04期

5 蔡桑,蔡學(xué)見,陳錚立,董吉榮,房文峰,劉斌,時(shí)忠華;側(cè)腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)治療交通性腦積水116例[J];人民軍醫(yī);2005年03期

6 孔令常;邢東風(fēng);鮑慶華;鄭楊;;交通性腦積水的診斷與治療[J];中國(guó)實(shí)用神經(jīng)疾病雜志;2013年04期

7 王弘略;;腦室-腹腔分流術(shù)治療交通性腦積水56例體會(huì)[J];大家健康(學(xué)術(shù)版);2013年16期

8 劉弼臣,沙海汶;中醫(yī)中藥治愈交通性腦積水一例報(bào)告[J];北京醫(yī)學(xué);1980年04期

9 林為英;;中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治療交通性腦積水1例[J];福建醫(yī)藥雜志;1991年04期

10 張郁文,朱永獻(xiàn),朱德明;交通性腦積水1例[J];蚌埠醫(yī)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1997年01期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前4條

1 李國(guó)平;李浩;賀明;黃思慶;游潮;;微創(chuàng)治療交通性腦積水256例并長(zhǎng)期隨訪[A];中華醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)神經(jīng)外科學(xué)分會(huì)第九次學(xué)術(shù)會(huì)議論文匯編[C];2010年

2 陳景森;胡未偉;劉其昌;劉偉國(guó);陳高;;正常顱壓腦積水的診斷與治療[A];2008年浙江省神經(jīng)外科學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)年會(huì)論文匯編[C];2008年

3 唐建建;楊X;;腰大池-腹腔分流術(shù)治療交通性腦積水[A];2011中華醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)神經(jīng)外科學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)會(huì)議論文匯編[C];2011年

4 戰(zhàn)華;王寧;趙世光;;腦室內(nèi)注入HGF治療TGF-beta1誘導(dǎo)的小鼠交通性腦積水[A];中國(guó)醫(yī)師協(xié)會(huì)神經(jīng)外科醫(yī)師分會(huì)第四屆全國(guó)代表大會(huì)論文匯編[C];2009年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 志鐵;治療腦積水有新法[N];廣東科技報(bào);2001年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 蔣生智;PC cine MRI在腦積水的診斷及治療中的臨床價(jià)值[D];寧夏醫(yī)科大學(xué);2015年

2 秦君翔;兩種術(shù)式應(yīng)用可調(diào)壓分流管治療交通性腦積水療效和安全性評(píng)估[D];大連醫(yī)科大學(xué);2015年

3 王暉;交通性腦積水的實(shí)驗(yàn)性研究[D];寧夏醫(yī)科大學(xué);2010年

4 劉紅江;顱腦術(shù)后交通性腦積水行腦室腹腔分流術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的研究[D];河北醫(yī)科大學(xué);2014年

5 崔玉志;五苓散水煎劑在腦外傷后交通性腦積水保守治療中的應(yīng)用觀察[D];山東中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2010年

6 李濟(jì)平;腰大池—腹腔分流術(shù)治療交通性腦積水的臨床分析[D];浙江大學(xué);2013年

7 邢永國(guó);神經(jīng)內(nèi)鏡第三腦室底造瘺術(shù)治療交通性腦積水的臨床研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：1541651