RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Hemorrhage in the basal ganglia is a common type of intracerebral hemorrhage and has high mortality and poor prognosis. In our study, we aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes and functional recovery after evacuation of hematoma using either craniotomy or endoscopy. METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from 58 patients with basal ganglia hemorrhage who were treated with hematoma evacuation using either craniotomy or endoscopy. Magnetic resonance imaging and a navigation system were used for calculating hematoma volume and for navigation during surgery. Clinical information and surgical outcomes were recorded. At 6-month follow-up, the recovery of neurologic function and the results of the Aphasia Battery of Chinese test were assessed. RESULTS: The endoscopy group showed lower intraoperative blood loss (75.36 ± 45.56 vs. 462.67 ± 120.08 mL, P < 0.001), shorter operation time (1.59 ± 0.30 vs. 4.17 ± 0.86 hours, P < 0.001), and a higher hematoma clearance rate (0.93% ± 0.05% vs. 0.88% ± 0.13%, P = 0.04) than the craniotomy group, respectively. No significant differences in mortality were identified, but a trend toward lower mortality in the endoscopy group was apparent (7.14% in the endoscopy group vs. 16.67% in the craniotomy group, P = 0.43). Assessment of neurologic recovery indicated significant differences in the modified Rankin Scale grades between the 2 groups (χ2 = 4.381, P = 0.036). Listening comprehension and speaking ability were also better in the endoscopy group than the craniotomy group (χ2 = 4.693, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Evacuation by endoscopy had better surgical outcomes, recovery of neurologic function, and aphasia recovery than evacuation by craniotomy. It appears that endoscopy is the surgical treatment of choice for middle-aged and elderly patients with a basal ganglia hemorrhage volume of >35 mL.