Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ÁßÁõ µÎºÎ¼Õ»óȯÀÚÀÇ ¿¹ÈÄÀÎÀÚ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °íÂû Prognostic Factors in Patients with Severe Head Injury

´ëÇѽŰæ¿Ü°úÇÐȸÁö 1999³â 28±Ç 9È£ p.1288 ~ 1292
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̽¿í/Seung Wook Lee ±è¿À·æ/¿ìº´±æ/±è¼ºÈ£/¹èÀåÈ£/ÃÖº´¿¬/Á¶¼öÈ£/Oh Lyong Kim/Byung Gil Woo/Seong Bo Kim/Jang Ho Bae/Byung Yon Choi/Soo Ho Cho

Abstract

°á·Ð
1987³â 1¿ùºÎÅÍ 1996³â 12¿ù±îÁö 10³â°£º»¿ø¿¡¼­ Ä¡·á¹Þ¾Ò´ø µÎºÎ¼Õ»óȯÀÚ 2223¸íÁß
GCS 8 Á¡ÀÌÇÏÀÇ ÁßÁõ µÎºÎ ¼Õ»óȯÀÚ 292¸íÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ȸº¹°ú ¿¹ÈÄ¿¡ °ü°èÇÏ´Â ÀÎÀÚ¸¦ ¹à
È÷°í, ÀÌ ÀÎÀÚ¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© ÁßÁõ µÎºÎ¼Õ»ó¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀûÀýÇÑ Ä¡·á°èȹÀ» ¼ö¸³Çϴµ¥ ÀÌ¿ëÇϱâ À§
Çؼ­ º» ¿¬±¸¸¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1) ÁßÁõµÎºÎ¼Õ»óȯÀÚ´Â Àüü µÎºÎ¼Õ»óÀÇ 13.1%¸¦ Â÷ÁöÇÏ¿´°í ÀÌÁß ¹Ì¸¸¼º ³ú¼Õ»óÀº 63%
¿´À¸¸ç ȯÀÚÀÇ ºÐÆ÷´Â È°µ¿·®ÀÌ ¸¹Àº ÀþÀº ³²ÀÚ¿¡ ¸¹¾Ò´Ù.
2) ÃÊÁø½Ã CT¼Ò°ßÀº Á¾±«º´º¯ÀÌ ÀÖ´Â °æ¿ìº¸´Ù ¹Ì¸¸¼º ¼Õ»ó¿¡¼­ ³»¿ø½Ã GCSÀÌ ³ô°í ¿¹
ÈÄ°¡ ÁÁÀº °æÇâÀ» º¸¿´À¸¸ç, ƯÈ÷ ¹Ì¸¸¼º ¼Õ»ó ¥°°ú ¥±Çü¿¡¼­ ÇöÀúÈ÷ ÁÁÀº ¿¹Èĸ¦ º¸¿´´Ù.
3) ÁßÁõ µÎºÎ¼Õ»óȯÀÚ¿¡¼­ ¾î¸° ¿¬·ÉÃþ, ³»¿ø½Ã ³ôÀº GCS, ÁÁÀº ¿îµ¿¹ÝÀÀ, ¾ç¾ÈÀÇ Á¤»óÀû
ÀÎ ´ë±¤¹Ý»ç, ¹Ì¸¸¼º ³ú¼Õ»ó ¥±°ú ¥²Çü¿¡¼­ ÁÁÀº ¿¹Èĸ¦ º¸¿´À¸¸ç, ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ °á°ú´Â ȯÀÚÀÇ ¿¹
Èĸ¦ Æò°¡Çϴµ¥ À¯¿ëÇÏ°Ô ÀÌ¿ëµÉ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
Objective : To elucidate the problems that must be dealt with in the prognosis of
patients with severe head injury and to find out the prognosis factors related to severe
head injury.
Methods : A clinical analysis was carried out retrospectively with 292cases of severe
head-injured patients(Glasgow coma scale score 3-8) admitted to the our department for
10 years from January 1987 to December 1996.
Result : Patients who were classified as having severe brain injury belonged to 13 l%
of all craniocerebral trauma cases among which sixty-three cases had diffuse brain
injury. The causes of head injuries were motor vehicle accident. falls from heights,
bicycle anti other causes in order of frequency. Pediatric patients showed better
outcome(51.4%), compared with only 28.1% of all adult cases(p<0.0001). The patients
with high initial GCS score(6-8, 47.9%) had significantly better outcome than the
patients with low initial GCS score(3-5, 16.9%)(p<0.0001). Fifty point tares percents of
patients with good motor response had good outcome, whereas only 15.8 percent in
patients with poor motor response. The cases with diffuse head injury without basal
cistern compression had significantly higher percentage of good outcome(74.0%) than
those with basal cistern compression(16.9%, p<0.0001). The cases with normal pupillary
reaction had significantly higher percentage of good outcome(50.3%) than those with
bilateral oculomotor nerve palsy(18.4%, p<0.0001). The patients with skull fracture had
good outcome(48.1%), compare to 20 3% of patients without skull fracture(p<0.0017).
Conclusion : The good prognostic factors in this study were young ass, initial high
Glasgow coma scale. good motor response, diffuse brain injury type ¥°, ¥±, bilaterally
intact light reflex. with skull fracture Individual prognostic factor is significant to
indicate the patient's outcome and may be utilized for assessing the relative efficacy of
the alternative treatment and prognosis.

Å°¿öµå

Severe head injury; Prognostic factor; Glasgow coma scale; Computerized tomography; Motor;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KoreaMed
KAMS