A Retrospective Cohort Study of Neuroendoscopic Surgery versus Traditional Craniotomy on Surgical Success Rate, Postoperative Complications, and Prognosis in Patients with Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage

<table class="table-group" id="tab5"><tr><td><table class="table"><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="4"><hr/></td></tr><tr class="thead"><td class="align_left">Grouping</td><td class="align_center"><i>N</i></td><td class="align_center">MoCA scoring</td><td class="align_center">Fugl-Meyer scoring</td></tr><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="4"><hr/></td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Control group</td><td class="align_center">53</td><td class="align_center">20.17 ± 3.36<sup>a</sup></td><td class="align_center">58.43 ± 8.77<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Research group</td><td class="align_center">53</td><td class="align_center">25.28 ± 3.95<sup>b</sup></td><td class="align_center">74.33 ± 10.26<sup>b</sup></td></tr><tr><td class="align_left"><i>t</i></td><td class="align_center"> </td><td class="align_center">7.174</td><td class="align_center">8.576</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left"><span style="width: 8.15071ptpx;"><svg height="8.68572pt" id="M36" style="vertical-align:-0.0498209pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.6359 8.15071 8.68572" width="8.15071pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M600 480C600 590 528 650 384 650H143L137 622C222 614 225 607 210 531L130 127C113 41 106 36 23 28L17 0H294L300 28C204 36 195 42 212 127L243 284L314 263C327 263 339 263 352 264C465 271 600 337 600 480ZM508 481C508 351 402 304 329 304C289 304 265 311 250 317L295 559C302 594 310 606 323 611C335 616 350 619 367 619C455 619 508 573 508 481Z"></path></g></svg></span></td><td class="align_center"> </td><td class="align_center">＜0.05</td><td class="align_center">＜0.05</td></tr><tr class="table-tr"><td colspan="4"><hr class="tbody-hr"/></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr class="table-fn"><td><div>Note: comparison of control group before and after treatment, <sup>a</sup><span class="nowrap"><svg height="9.2729pt" id="M37" style="vertical-align:-0.6370001pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.6359 44.8393 9.2729" width="44.8393pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M600 480C600 590 528 650 384 650H143L137 622C222 614 225 607 210 531L130 127C113 41 106 36 23 28L17 0H294L300 28C204 36 195 42 212 127L243 284L314 263C327 263 339 263 352 264C465 271 600 337 600 480ZM508 481C508 351 402 304 329 304C289 304 265 311 250 317L295 559C302 594 310 606 323 611C335 616 350 619 367 619C455 619 508 573 508 481Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.658,0)"><path d="M512 -3V55L134 254V256L512 456V514L75 281V230L512 -3Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.921,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,29.161,0)"><path d="M113 -12C146 -12 170 11 170 46C170 78 146 103 114 103S58 78 58 46C58 11 82 -12 113 -12Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,32.125,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.365,0)"><path d="M153 550H386L412 615L406 623H120L82 318C104 327 142 338 184 338C294 338 347 275 347 187C347 112 305 39 221 39C160 39 119 71 97 89C88 97 80 96 71 90C59 80 50 67 49 57C48 45 52 36 66 23C80 9 123 -12 169 -12C221 -11 288 15 342 59C403 109 431 165 431 225C431 308 366 395 238 395C212 395 165 379 127 364L153 550Z"></path></g></svg>;</span> comparison of research group before and after treatment, <sup>b</sup><span class="nowrap"><svg height="9.2729pt" id="M38" style="vertical-align:-0.6370001pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.6359 44.8393 9.2729" width="44.8393pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M600 480C600 590 528 650 384 650H143L137 622C222 614 225 607 210 531L130 127C113 41 106 36 23 28L17 0H294L300 28C204 36 195 42 212 127L243 284L314 263C327 263 339 263 352 264C465 271 600 337 600 480ZM508 481C508 351 402 304 329 304C289 304 265 311 250 317L295 559C302 594 310 606 323 611C335 616 350 619 367 619C455 619 508 573 508 481Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.658,0)"><path d="M512 -3V55L134 254V256L512 456V514L75 281V230L512 -3Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.921,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,29.161,0)"><path d="M113 -12C146 -12 170 11 170 46C170 78 146 103 114 103S58 78 58 46C58 11 82 -12 113 -12Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,32.125,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.365,0)"><path d="M153 550H386L412 615L406 623H120L82 318C104 327 142 338 184 338C294 338 347 275 347 187C347 112 305 39 221 39C160 39 119 71 97 89C88 97 80 96 71 90C59 80 50 67 49 57C48 45 52 36 66 23C80 9 123 -12 169 -12C221 -11 288 15 342 59C403 109 431 165 431 225C431 308 366 395 238 395C212 395 165 379 127 364L153 550Z"></path></g></svg>.</span><br/></div></td></tr></table>

<div>Comparison of cognitive and physical function recovery between the two groups [<span class="nowrap"><svg height="9.57299pt" id="M35" style="vertical-align:-0.3499308pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -9.22306 25.7577 9.57299" width="25.7577pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><rect height="0.65243" width="7.29424" x="0" y="-8.52081"></rect><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M536 404C536 423 520 448 491 448C445 448 398 404 308 283L286 338C255 416 242 448 217 448C182 448 138 402 92 341L111 321C149 368 169 378 178 378C188 378 198 363 214 320L254 212C185 117 138 65 107 65C98 65 85 69 82 75C79 82 73 86 65 86C44 86 23 60 23 39C23 7 44 -12 71 -12C119 -12 168 33 265 177L306 61C321 17 347 -12 373 -12C413 -12 465 33 507 96L491 119C459 84 432 60 413 60C395 60 378 92 358 148L321 250C341 279 369 310 389 332C417 363 439 382 456 382C466 382 475 376 481 368C486 361 492 358 496 358C513 358 536 381 536 404Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,10.2,0)"><path d="M535 290V340H323V533H265V340H52V290H265V84H323V290H535ZM535 -22V28H52V-22H535Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,20.736,0)"><path d="M352 391C352 416 319 448 267 448C236 448 173 423 147 400C107 364 96 332 96 304C96 248 143 210 193 181C241 153 258 124 258 100C258 72 232 38 184 38C151 38 107 66 81 108C77 114 64 116 55 111C34 99 23 84 23 65C23 29 81 -12 134 -12C220 -12 325 61 325 141C325 184 297 215 234 256C194 282 161 309 161 346C161 380 188 401 217 401C255 401 279 380 301 353C308 344 313 341 325 347C341 355 352 371 352 391Z"></path></g></svg>,</span> points].</div>

Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience

tab5

Table 5

Table 5: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Neuroendoscopic Surgery versus Traditional Craniotomy on Surgical Success Rate, Postoperative Complications, and Prognosis in Patients with Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage 

Table 5 | A Retrospective Cohort Study of Neuroendoscopic Surgery versus Traditional Craniotomy on Surgical Success Rate, Postoperative Complications, and Prognosis in Patients with Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage 