血管内介入治疗后循环供血区急性梗死104例临床分析

目的 探讨血管内介入治疗后循环供血区急性梗死患者的临床疗效。方法 选取本院2005年3月～2016年3月收治的104例后循环供血区急性梗死患者作为介入组,采用血管内介入治疗方法对该组患者实施治疗,选取同期收治的接受内科药物治疗的104例后循环供血区急性梗死患者作为对照组,并对2组的临床疗效进行评价。结果 治疗前介入组的神经功能缺损程度(脑卒中临床神经功能缺损程度评分量表)评分与对照组比较无显著性差异(t=0.499,P>0.05),治疗后神经功能优于对照组(t=6.086,P<0.05); 介入组、对照组的血管再通率分别为82.7%、56.7%,2组比较差异明显(χ²=16.599,P<0.05); 介入组、对照组治疗后随访3个月的日常生活能力评分(ADL评分)分别为(53.6±4.2)、(45.9±4.1)分,2组比较差异明显(t=5.867,P<0.05)。结论 采用血管内介入治疗方法对后循环供血区急性梗死患者实施治疗,疗效可靠,能够有效改善患者预后。

Clinical analysis of 104 patients with posterior circulation acute cerebral infarction after endovascular intervention treatment

ObjectiveTo analyze the clinical effect of endovascular intervention method on treating patients who suffer from posterior circulation acute cerebral infarction.Methods Patients with posterior circulation acute cerebral infarction treated in our hospital from March, 2005 to March, 2016 are selected as intervention group and normal group, 104 cases for each group. Endovascular intervention treatment method is given to intervention group while medical therapy is offered to normal group; clinical effect of these two groups is evaluated.Results Before treatment, there is no significant difference of neurologic impairment situation(stroke clinical neurologic impairment rating scale)between these two groups(t=0.499, P>0.05); after treatment, neurological function of intervention group is better than that of normal group(t=6.086; P<0.05). Vessel repass rate of intervention group and normal group are 82.7% and 56.7% respectively, with an obvious difference(χ²=16.599, P<0.05); after follow-up visit for 3 months in posttreatment, ADL score of intervention group and normal group is respectively(53.6±4.2)and(45.9±4.1), with a significant difference(t=5.867, P<0.05).Conclusion It is reliable to apply endovascular intervention method to treat patients with posterior circulation acute cerebral infarction, which can effectively improve patients' prognosis.