Comparative Analysis of Surgical Indicators, Hematoma Clearance Rate, and Inflammatory Factor Levels between Minimally Invasive Hard Channel Drainage and Neuroendoscopic-Assisted Intracerebral Hematoma Evacuation in Cerebral Hemorrhage

To compare the surgical indicators, hematoma clearance rate, and inflammatory factor levels between minimally invasive hard channel drainage and neuroendoscopic-assisted intracerebral hematoma evacuation in cerebral hemorrhage. Eighty-four cerebral hemorrhage patients were selected and randomly divided into two groups (42 cases each). The observation group underwent minimally invasive hard channel puncture and drainage, while the control group underwent neuroendoscopic - assisted hematoma evacuation. Relevant indicators were compared between the two groups. The clinical indicators of surgery in the observation group, as well as the levels of IL-6 and TNF- α in the observation group 3 days after surgery, were better than those in the control group (P<0.05). The hematoma clearance rate, NIHSS, and GCS scores were similar to those in the control group (P>0.05). Minimally invasive hard channel puncture and drainage significantly outperformed neuroendoscopic - assisted hematoma evacuation in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay, while both methods achieved comparable neurological recovery. Additionally, the hard channel technique induced less inflammatory stimulation and milder postoperative inflammatory responses. The efficacy of hard channel drainage is not inferior to neuroendoscopic evacuation, making it a viable alternative for hematoma removal. The choice of surgical method should be based on the patient's specific condition and available resources.