Zhao S J, Xue A, Li Y, Chen J, Huang Z F, Zhou W, Yu L P, Yin G Y, Li Q Q
Department of Orthopedics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China.
Jiangsu Institute of Functional Reconstruction and Rehabilitation, Nanjing 210029, China.
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2024 Oct 8;104(37):3490-3497. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20240130-00235.
To comparing the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in posterior surgery for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) between robotic-assisted and traditional freehand techniques. This retrospective study included 92 patients with ADS who underwent posterior spinal surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (Jiangsu Province Hospital) between March 2019 and December 2023. There were 19 males and 73 females with a mean age of (63.6±9.8) years. The patients were divided into two groups based on the technique used for pedicle screw placement: robot-assisted group (34 cases) and manual group (58 cases). Operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, facet joint violation, postoperative complications, magnitude of curve correction, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores preoperatively, 1 week postoperatively, and 1 month postoperatively were compared and analyzed between the two groups. The Gertzbein-Robbins classification criteria was used to assess the accuracy of screw placement. Differences in baseline data, operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, magnitude of curve correction, and VAS and ODI scores preoperatively, 1 week postoperatively, and 1 month postoperatively between the two groups exhibited no statistically significant differences (all >0.05). The accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the robot-assisted group was significantly higher than that in the manual group [90.9% (416/458) vs 80.1% (697/870), <0.001]. In terms of surgical segments, in T-T and L-S segments, the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the robot group were both significantly higher than those in the control group [91.5% (130/142) vs 77.8% (186/239), =0.001; 90.3% (271/300) vs 80.8% (502/621), <0.001]. However, no significant differences was observed in the accuracy of S-alar-iliac (SAI) screw placement between the two groups [90.0%(9/10) vs 93.8%(15/16), =0.727]. Moreover, no significant differences was found in the deviation direction of the cortical screw penetration between both groups (=0.133). Significant differences were observed in the accuracy of screw placement between the Nash Moe 2 and 3 vertebral bodies in the robot group compared with those in the control group [88.9% (88/99) vs 71.0% (115/162), =0.001; 89.2% (83/93) vs 60.2% (68/113), <0.001]. Additionally, the incidence and grade of facet joint violation in the manual group were both significantly higher than those in the robot-assisted group (both <0.001). No statistically significant differences was identified in postoperative complications between the two groups (=0.841). It suggests that robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in posterior surgery for patients with ADS can significantly improve the accuracy of screw placement and reduce the incidence of facet joint violation.
比较机器人辅助技术与传统徒手技术在成人退变性脊柱侧凸(ADS)后路手术中椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性。这项回顾性研究纳入了92例于2019年3月至2023年12月在南京医科大学第一附属医院(江苏省人民医院)接受后路脊柱手术的ADS患者。其中男性19例,女性73例,平均年龄(63.6±9.8)岁。根据椎弓根螺钉置入技术将患者分为两组:机器人辅助组(34例)和手动组(58例)。比较并分析两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、小关节侵犯情况、术后并发症、侧弯矫正度数、术前、术后1周及术后1个月的视觉模拟评分(VAS)和Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评分。采用Gertzbein-Robbins分类标准评估螺钉置入的准确性。两组患者的基线数据、手术时间、术中出血量、侧弯矫正度数以及术前、术后1周和术后1个月的VAS和ODI评分差异均无统计学意义(均>0.05)。机器人辅助组椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性显著高于手动组[90.9%(416/458)对80.1%(697/870),<0.001]。在手术节段方面,在胸段和腰段,机器人组椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性均显著高于对照组[91.5%(130/142)对77.8%(186/239),=0.001;90.3%(271/300)对80.8%(502/621),<0.001]。然而,两组之间骶骨-髂骨(SAI)螺钉置入的准确性差异无统计学意义[90.0%(9/10)对93.8%(15/16),=0.727]。此外,两组之间皮质螺钉穿透的偏差方向差异无统计学意义(=0.133)。与对照组相比,机器人组中Nash Moe 2级和3级椎体的螺钉置入准确性差异有统计学意义[88.9%(88/99)对71.