Department of Spine Surgery, Hong Hui Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, No. 76 Nanguo Road, Nanshao gate, Xi'an, 710054, Shaanxi Province, China.
Int Orthop. 2021 Jun;45(6):1531-1538. doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04825-1. Epub 2020 Sep 28.
The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw implantation is a safe and effective method in lumbar surgery, but it still remains controversial in lumbar revision surgery. This study evaluated the clinical safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus freehand pedicle screw implantation in lumbar revision surgery.
This was a retrospective study. From January 2018 to December 2019, 81 patients underwent posterior lumbar revision surgery in our hospital. Among them, 39 patients underwent revision surgery performed with robot-assisted pedicle screw implantation (Renaissance robotic system), whereas the remaining 42 patients underwent traditional freehand pedicle screw implantation. All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and X-ray before revision surgery. The sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, operative time, blood loss, operative segments, intra-operative fluoroscopy time, and complications were compared between the two groups. The accuracy of pedicle screw implantation was measured on CT scans based on Gertzbein Robbins grading, and the invasion of superior level facet joint was evaluated by Babu's method.
There was no statistical difference about the baseline between the two groups (P > 0.05). Although there were no significant differences in operative time and complications between the two groups (P > 0.05), the robot-assisted group had significantly less intra-operative blood loss and shorter intra-operative fluoroscopy times than the freehand group (P < 0.05). In the robot-assisted group, a total of 267 screws were inserted, which were marked as grade A in 250, grade B in 13, grade C in four, and no grade D or E in any screw. In terms of invasion of superior level facet joint, a total of 78 screws were inserted in the robot-assisted group, which were marked as grade 0 in 73, grade 1 in four, grade 2 in one, and grade 3 in zero. By comparison, 288 screws were placed in total in the freehand group, which were rated as grade A in 251, grade B in 28, grade C in eight, grade D in one, and no grade E in any screw. A total of 82 superior level facet joint screws were inserted in freehand group, which were marked as grade 0 in 62, grade one in 18, grade 2 in two, and grade 3 in zero. The robot-assisted technique was statistically superior to the freehand method in the accuracy of screw placement (P < 0.05).
Compared with freehand screw implantation, in lumbar revision surgery, the Renaissance robot had higher accuracy and safety of pedicle screw implantation, fewer superior level facet joint violations, and less intra-operative blood loss and intra-operative fluoroscopy time.
机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉植入术在腰椎手术中是一种安全有效的方法,但在腰椎翻修手术中仍存在争议。本研究评估了机器人辅助与徒手椎弓根螺钉植入术在腰椎翻修手术中的临床安全性和准确性。
这是一项回顾性研究。2018 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月,我院 81 例患者行后路腰椎翻修术。其中,39 例采用机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉植入术(Renaissance 机器人系统)进行翻修手术,其余 42 例采用传统徒手椎弓根螺钉植入术。所有患者在翻修术前均行磁共振成像(MRI)、计算机断层扫描(CT)和 X 线检查。比较两组患者的性别、年龄、体重指数、骨密度、手术时间、出血量、手术节段、术中透视时间和并发症。根据 Gertzbein Robbins 分级评估椎弓根螺钉植入的准确性,采用 Babu 法评估上关节突关节侵犯情况。
两组患者的基线资料无统计学差异(P>0.05)。两组患者手术时间和并发症比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但机器人辅助组术中出血量和术中透视时间明显少于徒手组(P<0.05)。在机器人辅助组中,共置入 267 枚螺钉,其中 250 枚为 A 级,13 枚为 B 级,4 枚为 C 级,无 D 级或 E 级螺钉。在上关节突关节侵犯方面,机器人辅助组共置入 78 枚螺钉,其中 73 枚为 0 级,4 枚为 1 级,1 枚为 2 级,0 级为 3 级。相比之下,徒手组共置入 288 枚螺钉,其中 251 枚为 A 级,28 枚为 B 级,8 枚为 C 级,1 枚为 D 级,无 E 级螺钉。在上关节突关节螺钉置入方面,徒手组共置入 82 枚螺钉,其中 62 枚为 0 级,18 枚为 1 级,2 枚为 2 级,0 级为 3 级。机器人辅助技术在螺钉置入的准确性方面明显优于徒手方法(P<0.05)。
与徒手螺钉植入相比,在腰椎翻修手术中,Renaissance 机器人具有更高的椎弓根螺钉植入准确性和安全性,对上关节突关节的侵犯较少,术中出血量和术中透视时间更少。