Mert Ümit, Mahmoud Mohamad Agha, Ghandour Maher, Al Zuabi Ahmad, Speicher Marco, Kobbe Philipp, Horst Klemens, Hildebrand Frank, Kabir Koroush
Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Helios University Hospital, University Witten/Herdecke, 42283 Wuppertal, Germany.
Department of Orthopedics, Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, RWTH Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2024 Aug 27;13(17):5072. doi: 10.3390/jcm13175072.
Femoral neck fractures pose significant surgical challenges with high morbidity and mortality. Traditional freehand screw placement often yields variable outcomes. Recent robotic advancements offer a promising alternative with enhanced precision. This systematic review compares the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted versus freehand techniques. A comprehensive literature search across multiple databases up to July 2024 included studies comparing both techniques. Primary outcomes were the union rate and time, functional outcomes, operative time, intraoperative parameters, and complication rates. Meta-regression analyses identified treatment response determinants. Twenty-four studies (1437 patients) were included. Robot-assisted screw placement significantly improved the union rate, reduced the union time, and showed superior functional outcomes. Additionally, it resulted in shorter operative times, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer instances of fluoroscopy and guide pin insertion. The risk of femoral neck necrosis was notably lower with robotic assistance. Meta-regression highlighted the robot type, patient age, and sample size as significant factors. Despite the promise of robot-assisted screw placement, limitations exist. The evidence being mainly from China raises concerns about generalizability. The lack of long-term follow-up data hinders assessment of technique durability. Unreported surgeon expertise levels and learning curves affect result validity. High initial costs and steep learning curves of robotic systems also present barriers to widespread adoption.
股骨颈骨折带来了重大的手术挑战,具有较高的发病率和死亡率。传统的徒手螺钉置入往往会产生不同的结果。最近的机器人技术进步提供了一种有前景的替代方法,具有更高的精度。本系统综述比较了机器人辅助技术与徒手技术的疗效和安全性。对截至2024年7月的多个数据库进行的全面文献检索纳入了比较这两种技术的研究。主要结局包括愈合率和愈合时间、功能结局、手术时间、术中参数和并发症发生率。Meta回归分析确定了治疗反应的决定因素。纳入了24项研究(1437例患者)。机器人辅助螺钉置入显著提高了愈合率,缩短了愈合时间,并显示出更好的功能结局。此外,它还缩短了手术时间,减少了术中失血,减少了透视和导针插入的次数。机器人辅助下股骨颈坏死的风险显著降低。Meta回归强调机器人类型、患者年龄和样本量是重要因素。尽管机器人辅助螺钉置入有前景,但也存在局限性。证据主要来自中国,这引发了对普遍性的担忧。缺乏长期随访数据阻碍了对技术耐久性的评估。未报告的外科医生专业水平和学习曲线影响结果的有效性。机器人系统的高初始成本和陡峭的学习曲线也成为广泛应用的障碍。