电解式和机械式可脱弹簧圈栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤的比较

目的 比较电解式可脱弹簧圈（GDC）和机械式可脱弹簧圈（MDS）栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤的效果。方法 1996－05／2000－10，采用MDS栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤28例29个动脉瘤；采用GDC栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤41例43个动脉瘤，对两种栓塞材料的特点和治疗效果进行分析。结果 采用MDS栓塞治疗29个动脉瘤，完全栓塞23个，次全栓塞3个及不全栓塞3个。1例栓塞术中血栓形成，遗留1例肢体偏瘫。采用GDC栓塞治疗43个动脉瘤，完全栓塞35个, 次全栓塞4个及不全栓塞4个。术中血栓形成2例，经尿激酶溶栓和抗凝治疗，1例恢复另1例遗留轻瘫。微导丝刺破动脉瘤壁1例，致密填塞弹簧圈后治愈，两组患均无死亡。结论 GDC和MDS均为栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤理想材料，MDS价格低廉，GDC较MDS更安全。

Comparison between effects of endovascular treatment for intracranial aneurysms with Guglielmi detachable coils and mechanical detachable spirals

AIM To compare the effect of endovascular treatment for intracranial aneurysms with Guglielmi detachable coils (GDC) and mechanical delachable spirals (MDS). METHODS From May 1996 to October 2000, 28 patients with 29 intracra nial aneurysms were treated with MDS, and 41 patients with 43 intracranial aneurysm were treated with GDC in our department. Features and effects were analysed between two differet embolic materials for treating intracranial aneurysms. RESULTS Of 29 aneurysms who underwent MDS embolization, a complete occlusion was achieved in 23 aneurysms, sabtotal occlusion in 3, and incomplete occlusion in 3. One patient who suffered thrombosis during the procedure presented with light hemiparalysis. Of 43 aneurysms who underwent GDS embolization, a complete occlusion was achieved in 35 aneurysms, subtotal occlusion in 4, and incomplete occlusion in 4. Of 2 patients who suffered thrombosis during the procedure, 1 recovered and 1 presented with light hemiparalysis after urokinase perfusion and anticoagulation. One was cured, who experienced aneurysmal wall perforation due to microguidewire, after densely packing coils. No death occurred in two groups. CONCLUSION GDC and MDS are both ideal embolic materials for treating intraeranial anenrysms. It seems that GDC is safer than MDS, but MDS is much cheaper.