Orthopaedic Department, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 32# W. Sec 2, 1st Ring Rd, Qingyang District, Chengdu, 610072, China.
Chinese Academy of Sciences Sichuan Translational Medicine Research Hospital, Chengdu, 610072, China.
Int Orthop. 2023 Mar;47(3):839-845. doi: 10.1007/s00264-022-05532-9. Epub 2022 Aug 4.
The purpose of this study was to assess the efficiency, safety, and accuracy of cannulated screw fixation using a robot-assisted method compared with a traditional percutaneous freehand method.
This retrospective clinical study included 18 patients with scaphoid fracture who underwent cannulated screw fixation by robot-assisted technique or traditional percutaneous freehand technique from June 2018 to June 2020. All patients were divided into the robot-assisted group (9 patients) or the traditional surgery group (9 patients). The operation time, blood loss, number of intra-operative fluoroscopies, fracture healing time, Mayo wrist function score, and screw implantation accuracy were recorded in the two groups.
The average age of the robot-assisted group was 37.9 ± 10.6 years (with a range of 30 to 52 years), there were eight males and one female, and there were six cases of scaphoid fracture on the right side and three on the left side. The average pre-operative time was 2.8 ± 0.7 days (ranging from 1 to 3 days). The average age of the traditional surgery group was 31.6 ± 6.8 years (with a range of 20 to 45 years), there were eight males and one female, and there were five cases of scaphoid fracture on the right side and four on the left side. The average pre-operative time was 2.1 ± 0.8 days (with a range of 2 to 4 days). The number of intra-operative fluoroscopies was 24.4 ± 3.5 in the traditional surgery group, whereas it was only 10.1 ± 1.9 in the robot-assisted group, which was significantly lower (P < 0.05). The average operation time of the traditional operation group was 48.4 ± 12.2 min, and that of the robot-assisted group was 32.6 ± 4.2 minutes, which was significantly shorter (P < 0.05). The angles between the actual screw position and the central axis of the scaphoid on both the coronal and sagittal post-operative CT images were 8.3° ± 2.3° and 8.8° ± 1.6° for the traditional operation group and 3.8° ± 0.8° and 4.3° ± 1.2° for the robot-assisted group, so the accuracy of the robot-assisted group was significantly higher (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in wrist function recovery or fracture healing time.
Robot-assisted treatment of scaphoid fracture is more accurate than traditional freehand technology, with shorter operation time and fewer intra-operative fluoroscopies. There is no difference between the two surgical techniques in intra-operative bleeding, post-operative fracture healing, or functional recovery. Robot-assisted surgery is a safe, effective, and accurate method for treating scaphoid fracture.
本研究旨在评估机器人辅助与传统经皮徒手两种方法行空心螺钉固定的效率、安全性和准确性。
本回顾性临床研究纳入了 2018 年 6 月至 2020 年 6 月期间接受机器人辅助技术或传统经皮徒手技术治疗的 18 例舟状骨骨折患者。所有患者均分为机器人辅助组(9 例)或传统手术组(9 例)。记录两组患者的手术时间、出血量、术中透视次数、骨折愈合时间、Mayo 腕关节功能评分和螺钉植入准确性。
机器人辅助组患者的平均年龄为 37.9±10.6 岁(范围 30 至 52 岁),男性 8 例,女性 1 例,右侧舟状骨骨折 6 例,左侧 3 例。术前平均时间为 2.8±0.7 天(范围 1 至 3 天)。传统手术组患者的平均年龄为 31.6±6.8 岁(范围 20 至 45 岁),男性 8 例,女性 1 例,右侧舟状骨骨折 5 例,左侧 4 例。术前平均时间为 2.1±0.8 天(范围 2 至 4 天)。传统手术组术中透视次数为 24.4±3.5 次,而机器人辅助组仅为 10.1±1.9 次,明显更低(P<0.05)。传统手术组的平均手术时间为 48.4±12.2 分钟,机器人辅助组为 32.6±4.2 分钟,明显更短(P<0.05)。术后冠状位和矢状位 CT 图像上实际螺钉位置与舟状骨中心轴之间的角度,传统手术组分别为 8.3°±2.3°和 8.8°±1.6°,机器人辅助组分别为 3.8°±0.8°和 4.3°±1.2°,机器人辅助组的准确性明显更高(P<0.05)。两组在腕关节功能恢复或骨折愈合时间方面无显著差异。
与传统徒手技术相比,机器人辅助治疗舟状骨骨折更准确,手术时间更短,术中透视次数更少。两种手术技术在术中出血量、术后骨折愈合和功能恢复方面无差异。机器人辅助手术是治疗舟状骨骨折的一种安全、有效、准确的方法。