Abstract:Abstract: Objective To compare and analyze the clinical efficacy and safety between endoscopic minimally invasive surgery and minimally invasive drainage for hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage. Methods The clinical data of 90 cases patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage from January 2017 to December 2017 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. According to the different surgical methods, all the 90 cases patients were divided into A group (47 cases, underwent endoscopic minimally invasive surgery) and B group (43 cases, underwent minimally invasive drainage). The operation time, bleeding volume, clearance of hematoma, hospital stay, postoperative complication and prognosis conditions were compared between the two groups. Results The operation time in the B group was significantly shorter than that in the A group, and the bleeding volume in the B group was significantly less than that in the A group, and the clearance of hematoma in the A group (92.84 ± 4.73)% was significantly higher than that in the B group (87.52 ± 5.39)%, all above had statistical difference (P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the hospital stay, recurrence rate, complication rate and mortality rate between two groups (P > 0.05). At 3 months after operation, the NIHSS scores were significantly decreased and the ADL scores were significantly increased before operation, all above had statistical difference (P < 0.05), there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05) while there was no statistical difference in the NIHSS and ADL scores between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion The endoscopic minimally invasive surgery could improve the removal of hematoma, and the minimally invasive drainage could shorten operative time and reduce intraoperative blood loss. Both the two methods are safe, reliable and have good prognosis.