Comparative effectiveness of frontal neuroendoscopic surgery versus minimally invasive puncture drainage in hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhage
CHEN Da-yu
HUANG Qi-lin
LIU Ning
DU Wei
WEI Ke
YANG Liu
YAO Guo-jie
Abstract：Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety between frontal neuroendoscopic surgery and minimally invasive puncture drainage for hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhage(HBGH).Methods The clinical data of 85 patients with HBGH treated between July 2020 and July 2022 were analyzed retrospectively.Of the 85 patients,30 patients received frontal neuroendoscopic evacuation(endoscopic group)and 55 patients underwent minimally invasive puncture drainage(drainage group).Results No significant differences were observed in rebleeding rates(6.67%vs.3.64%;P=0.947),7-day hematoma clearance[(96.23±1.52)%vs.(95.55±1.35)%;P=0.728),or 6-month Activities of Daily Living(ADL)scores[(87.38±6.67)vs.(86.53±6.14);P=0.495].The endoscopic group demonstrated superior early neurological recovery(1-day GCS:12.69±2.07 vs.10.51±1.31;P<0.001)but required longer operative time[(96.41±5.17)minutes vs.(17.29±4.32)minutes;P<0.001]and incurred greater blood loss[(72.32±3.37)ml vs.(7.29±2.58)ml;P<0.001].Immediate postoperative hematoma clearance significantly favored the endoscopic approach[(96.23±1.52)%vs.(13.51±2.56)%;P<0.001].Conclusions Both minimally invasive techniques effectively manage basal ganglia hemorrhage.Neuroendoscopic surgery enables earlier neurological recovery,while puncture drainage offers procedural efficiency with reduced invasiveness.Long-term functional outcomes remain comparable between the two approaches.
Keywords：Hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhageBasal gangliaFrontal neuroendoscopic surgeryMinimally invasive puncture drainageTreatment efficacy
Publication Date：2025-03-25
Online Publishing Date：2025-08-15(First online date of this platform, not the publication date of the document)
Pages：6( 129-134 )