Robot-assisted internal fixation of calcaneal fractures versus conventional open reduction internal fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted (RA) percutaneous hollow screw fixation with traditional open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of calcaneal fractures through a systematic review and meta-analysis. An extensive search was conducted in the following databases-PubMed, CNKI, Embase, and the Cochrane Library-to gather research on patients with calcaneal fractures published up to July 2024. This search focuses on studies comparing the effectiveness of robot-assisted percutaneous cannulated screw fixation versus ORIF. We will include studies published in both English and Chinese. Our screening process adhered strictly to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, emphasizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. The ROBINS-I tool was utilized to evaluate the risk of bias in non-randomized studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1. The final analysis incorporated six retrospective cohort studies comprising 247 patients-122 treated with robotic-assisted percutaneous cannulated screw fixation and 125 with conventional open reduction and internal fixation. The findings indicated that patients undergoing robotic-assisted percutaneous cannulated screw fixation experienced advantages over those receiving conventional treatment in terms of reduced hospital stay, lower estimated blood loss, and higher AOFAS scores at both 3 and 6 months. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two methods concerning operative time, fracture healing duration, or the frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopies. Robotic-assisted percutaneous cannulated screw fixation is a safe and viable treatment approach for patients with calcaneal fractures. When compared to ORIF methods, this robotic-assisted technique demonstrated significant benefits, including reduced hospital stay, lower estimated blood loss, and improved AOFAS scores at both 3 and 6 months.