Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare neuronavigation-assisted intracerebral hematoma puncture and drainage with neuroendoscopic hematoma removal for treatment of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. METHOD: Ninety-one patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage admitted to our neurosurgery department from June 2022 to May 2023 were selected: 47 patients who underwent endoscopic hematoma removal with the aid of neuronavigation in observation Group A and 44 who underwent intracerebral hematoma puncture and drainage in control Group B. The duration of surgery, intraoperative bleeding, hematoma clearance rate, pre- and postoperative GCS score, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, mRS score and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The duration of surgery, intraoperative bleeding and hematoma clearance were significantly lower in Group B than in Group A (p < 0.05). Conversely, no significant differences in the preoperative, 7-day postoperative, 14-day postoperative or 1-month postoperative GCS or NIHSS scores or the posthealing mRS score were observed between Groups A and B. However, the incidence of postoperative complications was significantly greater in Group B than in Group A (p < 0.05), with the most significant difference in incidence of intracranial infection (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both neuronavigation-assisted intracerebral hematoma puncture and drainage and neuroendoscopic hematoma removal are effective at improving the outcome of patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. The disadvantage of neuronavigation is that the incidence of complications is significantly greater than that of other methods; postoperative care and prevention of complications should be strengthened in clinical practice.