论文部分内容阅读
目的：对正常压力脑积水（NPH）病人行低压脑室腹腔分流（LPV）和中压脑室腹腔分流（MPV）的结果比较和总结。方法：均用美国生产的脑室腹腔引流管，20例NPH病人平均分为两组，每组10人，即LPv（压力40±10mmH2O）组和MPV（压力100±10mmH2O）组。NPH的主要诊断标准为进行性痴呆、步态失调和尿便失禁。术后1、3、6、9、12个月复查。平均进步：LPV组为70％，MPV组为50％；明显进步乃至症状完全消失者LPV组为50％，MPV组则为25％。整个结果说明LPV组效果较好。LPV组脑室缩小较MPV组明显，但硬膜下积液发生率为70％，而MPV组为30％，然而硬膜下积液对病人影响是不明显的。结论：对NPH病人LPV分流较MPV好，NPH的治疗以LPV分流为宜。
Objective: To compare and summarize the results of low pressure ventricle peritoneal shunt (LPV) and moderate pressure ventricle peritoneal shunt (MPV) in patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH). Methods: Ventricular peritoneal drainage tubes were made in the United States. Twenty patients with NPH were divided equally into two groups with 10 patients in each group: LPv (pressure 40 ± 10 mmH2O) and MPV (pressure 100 ± 10 mmH2O). The main diagnostic criteria for NPH are progressive dementia, gait disorders and urinary incontinence. 1,3,6,9,12 months after the review. The average progression was 70% in the LPV group and 50% in the MPV group; 50% in the LPV group and 25% in the MPV group, with significant improvement or even complete elimination of symptoms. The whole result shows that LPV group is better. The ventricular contractions in LPV group were more pronounced than those in MPV group, but the incidence of subdural effusion was 70% compared with 30% in MPV group, however, the effect of subdural effusion on patients was insignificant. Conclusions: LPV shunt is better than MPV in patients with NPH, and LPV shunt is advisable in the treatment of NPH.