Objective To compare and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of neuroendoscopy and conventional craniotomy in the treatment of hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage. Methods 60 patients with hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage admitted to our hospital from December 1,2015 to December 31,2017 were divided into the control group and the observation group,each with 30 cases. The control group underwent conventional craniotomy,and the observation group underwent neuroendoscopic treatment. The length of operation,intraoperative blood loss,hematoma clearance,length of hospital stay,postoperative complications,and follow-up after 6 months were compared between the two groups, to analysis the advantages and disadvantages of both groups. Results The duration of operation in the observation group was shorter than that in the control group （P<0.05）. The intraoperative blood loss in the observation group was less than that in the control group （P<0.05）;The hematoma clearance rate in the observation group was higher than that in the control group （P<0.05）;The incidence of postoperative complications （intracranial infection,lung infection） in the observation group was lower than that of the control group （P<0.05）. There was no statistically significant in rebleeding and mortality between the two groups （P>0.05）. The prognosis of the observation group was better than that of the control group. In the control group,the difference was statistically significant （P<0.05）. Conclusion Neuroendoscope in the treatment of hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage compared with conventional craniotomy may shorten the length of operation and hospital stay,improve hematoma clearance rate,reduce intraoperative bleeding,reduce intracranial and pulmonary infection and other advantages. It is worthy of clinical promotion and application.