Łajczak Paweł, Ayesha Ayesha, Jabbar Rabbia, Silva Yasmin Picanço, Sharma Eshita, Sahin Oguz Kagan, Lobo Kaike Eduardo da Silva, Petry Iago Nathan Simon, Ahmed Aisha Rizwan, Rocha Fabio Victor Vieira, Fagundes Walter, Silva Yan G M D
Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Geneuro - International Research Group in Neuroscience, Vitoria, Espirito Santo, Brazil.
Neurosurg Rev. 2025 Feb 21;48(1):257. doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03333-3.
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a prevalent spinal deformity, often requiring surgical intervention. Posterior pedicle spine instrumentation, a common procedure for correcting AIS, can be performed using freehand fluoroscopic (FHF), navigation-assisted (NVA), or robotic-assisted (RBA) techniques for pedicle screw insertion. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and clinical outcomes of these techniques through a Bayesian network meta-analysis (BNMA) of 764 patients and 8,144 screws from twelve studies. Our findings suggest that RBA offers superior accuracy in pedicle screw placement compared to both FHF and NVA. However, RBA is associated with longer operative times. NVA, in contrast, provides a balanced approach by offering good accuracy with relatively shorter surgery times. No significant differences were observed in blood loss, Cobb angle correction, or hospital stay between the techniques. Additionally, no statistically significant differences were found between RBA and NVA in terms of operative duration or blood loss. These results have important clinical implications, indicating that RBA may be the preferred option for achieving high precision, particularly in complex cases, while NVA remains a viable alternative for quicker procedures. Further research is needed to assess the long-term outcomes, radiation exposure, and cost-effectiveness of these techniques in clinical practice.
青少年特发性脊柱侧凸(AIS)是一种常见的脊柱畸形,通常需要手术干预。后路椎弓根脊柱内固定术是矫正AIS的常见手术,可使用徒手透视(FHF)、导航辅助(NVA)或机器人辅助(RBA)技术进行椎弓根螺钉植入。本研究旨在通过对12项研究中的764例患者和8144枚螺钉进行贝叶斯网络荟萃分析(BNMA),评估这些技术的准确性和临床结果。我们的研究结果表明,与FHF和NVA相比,RBA在椎弓根螺钉置入方面具有更高的准确性。然而,RBA与更长的手术时间相关。相比之下,NVA通过提供良好的准确性和相对较短的手术时间,提供了一种平衡的方法。在术中出血量、Cobb角矫正或住院时间方面,各技术之间未观察到显著差异。此外,在手术持续时间或术中出血量方面,RBA和NVA之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。这些结果具有重要的临床意义,表明RBA可能是实现高精度的首选方案,特别是在复杂病例中,而NVA仍然是更快手术的可行选择。需要进一步研究来评估这些技术在临床实践中的长期结果、辐射暴露和成本效益。