Suppr超能文献

机器人辅助经皮椎弓根螺钉置钉准确性与侧卧位单入路置钉中其他辅助方法的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement accuracy compared with alternative guidance in lateral single-position surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

1School of Medicine, Mercer University, Columbus, Georgia.

2Department of Neurosurgery, University at Buffalo, New York.

出版信息

J Neurosurg Spine. 2023 Jun 23;39(4):443-451. doi: 10.3171/2023.3.SPINE2329. Print 2023 Oct 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

While single-position surgery (SPS) eliminates the need for patient repositioning, the placement of screws in the unconventional lateral position poses unique challenges related to asymmetry relative to the surgical table. Use of robotic guidance or intraoperative navigation can help to overcome this. The aim of this study was to compare the relative accuracies offered by these various navigation modalities for pedicle screws placed in lateral SPS.

METHODS

According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies reporting pedicle screw placement accuracy using fluoroscopic, CT-navigated, O-arm, or robotic guidance in lateral SPS, and a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Included studies all compared evaluated screw placement accuracy in lateral SPS using a single navigation method. Quality assessment was performed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system; risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. The primary outcome, rate of pedicle screw breach, was analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included comprising 548 patients who underwent the placement of instrumentation with 2488 screws. For the fluoroscopic, CT-navigated, O-arm, and robotic guidance cohorts, there were 3, 2, 3, and 3 studies, respectively. Breach rates by modality were as follows: fluoroscopic guidance (6.6%), CT navigation (4.7%), O-arm (3.9%), and robotic guidance (3.9%). Random-effects meta-analysis showed a significant difference between studies, with an overall breach rate of 4.9% (95% CI 3.1%-7.5%; p < 0.001); however, testing for subgroup differences failed to show a significant difference between guidance modalities (QM = 0.69, df = 3; p = 0.88). Heterogeneity between studies was significant (I2 = 79.0%, τ2 = 0.41, χ2 = 47.65, df = 10; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic guidance of screws is noninferior to alternative guidance modalities in lateral SPS; however, additional prospective studies directly comparing different guidance types are merited.

摘要

目的

单次体位手术(SPS)消除了患者重新定位的需要,但在非常规的侧卧位中放置螺钉会带来与手术台相对不对称相关的独特挑战。机器人引导或术中导航可以帮助克服这一挑战。本研究的目的是比较各种导航方式在侧向 SPS 中放置椎弓根螺钉时提供的相对准确性。

方法

根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,对 PubMed/Medline、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库进行了查询,以查找使用透视、CT 导航、O 臂或机器人引导在侧向 SPS 中放置椎弓根螺钉的准确性报告的研究,并进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。纳入的研究均比较了使用单一导航方法评估的侧向 SPS 中螺钉放置的准确性。使用推荐评估、制定和评估(GRADE)系统进行质量评估;使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表和 Joanna Briggs 研究所清单进行偏倚风险评估。主要结果,椎弓根螺钉穿透率,使用随机效应荟萃分析进行分析。

结果

共纳入 11 项研究,共纳入 548 例接受器械置入的患者,共置入 2488 枚螺钉。透视、CT 导航、O 臂和机器人引导组分别有 3、2、3 和 3 项研究。按模态划分的穿透率分别为:透视引导(6.6%)、CT 导航(4.7%)、O 臂(3.9%)和机器人引导(3.9%)。随机效应荟萃分析显示研究之间存在显著差异,总体穿透率为 4.9%(95%CI3.1%-7.5%;p<0.001);然而,对亚组差异的检验未能显示引导方式之间存在显著差异(QM=0.69,df=3;p=0.88)。研究之间的异质性显著(I2=79.0%,τ2=0.41,χ2=47.65,df=10;p<0.001)。

结论

机器人引导螺钉在侧向 SPS 中与替代引导方式不劣于后者;然而,值得进行直接比较不同引导类型的前瞻性研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验