Meng Xiao-Tong, Guan Xiao-Fei, Zhang Hai-Long, He Shi-Sheng
Department of Orthopedic, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, 301 Yanchang Road, Shanghai, 200072, China.
Neurosurg Rev. 2016 Jul;39(3):385-91. doi: 10.1007/s10143-015-0679-2. Epub 2015 Dec 19.
Although application of intraoperative computer navigation technique had been integrated into placement of pedicle screws (PSs) in thoracic fusion for years, its security and practicability remain controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy, the operative time consumption, the amount of intraoperative blood loss, time of pedicle insertion and the incidence of complications of thoracic pedicle screw placement in patients with thoracic diseases such as scoliosis and kyphosis. Pubmed, Web of Knowledge, and Google scholar were searched to identify comparative studies of thoracic pedicle screw placement between intraoperative computer navigation and fluoroscopy-guided navigation. Outcomes of malposition rate, operative time consumption, insertion time, intraoperative blood loss, and the incidence of complications are evaluated. Fourteen articles including 1723 patients and 9019 PSs were identified matching inclusion criteria. The malposition rate was lower (RR: 0.33, 95 % CI: 0.28-0.38, P < 0.01) in computer navigation group than that in fluoroscopy-guided navigation group; the operative time was significantly longer [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 23.66, 95 % CI: 14.74-32.57, P < 0.01] in computer navigation group than that in fluoroscopy-guided navigation group. The time of insertion was shorter (WMD = -1.88, 95 % CI: -2.25- -1.52, P < 0.01) in computer navigation group than that in fluoroscopy-guided navigation group. The incidence of complications was lower (RR = 0. 23, 95 % CI: 0.12-0.46, P < 0.01) in computer navigation group than that in the other group. The intraoperative blood loss was fewer (WMD = -167.49, 95 % CI: -266.39- -68.58, P < 0.01) in computer navigation group than that in the other. In conclusion, the meta-analysis of thoracic pedicle screw placement studies clearly demonstrated lower malposition rate, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer complications when using computer navigation. This result provides strong evidence that computer technology could be safer and more reliable than fluoroscopy-guided navigation.
尽管术中计算机导航技术应用于胸椎融合术椎弓根螺钉(PSs)置入多年,但其安全性和实用性仍存在争议。本研究旨在评估计算机导航技术在脊柱侧弯和后凸等胸椎疾病患者胸椎椎弓根螺钉置入中的准确性、手术耗时、术中失血量、椎弓根置入时间及并发症发生率。通过检索PubMed、Web of Science和谷歌学术,以确定术中计算机导航与透视引导导航下胸椎椎弓根螺钉置入的对比研究。评估位置不当率、手术耗时、置入时间、术中失血量及并发症发生率等结果。共纳入14篇文章,包括1723例患者和9019枚PSs,符合纳入标准。计算机导航组的位置不当率低于透视引导导航组(RR:0.33,95%CI:0.28 - 0.38,P < 0.01);计算机导航组的手术时间显著长于透视引导导航组[加权均数差(WMD)= 23.66,95%CI:14.74 - 32.57,P < 0.01]。计算机导航组的置入时间短于透视引导导航组(WMD = -1.88,95%CI:-2.25 - -1.52,P < 0.01)。计算机导航组的并发症发生率低于另一组(RR = 0.23,95%CI:0.12 - 0.46,P < 0.01)。计算机导航组的术中失血量少于另一组(WMD = -167.49,95%CI:-266.39 - -68.58,P < 0.01)。总之,胸椎椎弓根螺钉置入研究的荟萃分析清楚地表明,使用计算机导航时位置不当率更低、术中失血量更少且并发症更少。这一结果提供了有力证据,表明计算机技术可能比透视引导导航更安全、更可靠。