首页|机器人辅助与传统徒手植钉治疗寰枢椎脱位的疗效比较

机器人辅助与传统徒手植钉治疗寰枢椎脱位的疗效比较

扫码查看
目的 比较机器人辅助与传统徒手植钉治疗寰枢椎脱位的临床疗效.方法 回顾分析2021年1月-2024年1月收治且符合选择标准的55例寰枢椎脱位患者临床资料.根据植钉方式不同分为传统组(采用传统徒手植钉技术,31例)和机器人组(采用Mazor X脊柱外科机器人辅助植钉技术,24例).两组患者性别、年龄、身体质量指数、病因及术前疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、颈椎日本骨科协会(JOA)评分等基线资料比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).记录并比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、手术费用及术中并发症发生情况.术前及术后1个月采用VAS评分和颈椎JOA评分评价患者疼痛和颈脊髓功能改善情况.术后3 d进行CT检查,参照Neo分级标准进行植钉精确性评价.结果 55例患者均顺利完成手术,机器人组手术时间、术中出血量和手术费用明显高于传统组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).两组共植入C1、C2椎弓根螺钉220枚,机器人组植入94枚,植钉精确率为95.7%,其中因术中滑移导致出血转传统徒手植钉2枚;传统组植入126枚,植钉精确率为87.3%,明显低于机器人组(P<0.05).术中机器人组和传统组分别出现1例和3例静脉丛损伤,均经压迫止血处理后好转;两组均无椎动脉损伤、脊髓损伤等其他术中并发症发生.患者均获随访,随访时间4~16个月,平均6.6个月;两组随访时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).两组患者术后颈部疼痛均明显缓解,神经症状得到不同程度缓解;术后1个月两组VAS评分与颈椎JOA评分均较术前明显改善(P<0.05),两组间评分变化值比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 在寰枢椎脱位治疗中,与传统徒手植钉技术相比,机器人辅助植钉的精确性具有显著优势.
Effectiveness comparison of robot-assisted and traditional freehand technology in treatment of atlantoaxial dislocation
Objective To compare the effectiveness of robot-assisted and traditional freehand screw placement in the treatment of atlantoaxial dislocation.Methods The clinical data of 55 patients with atlantoaxial dislocation who met the selection criteria between January 2021 and January 2024 were retrospectively analyzed.According to different screw placement methods,they were divided into the traditional group(using the traditional freedhand screw placement,31 cases)and the robot group(using the Mazor X robot-assisted screw placement,24 cases).There was no significant difference in gender,age,body mass index,etiology,and preoperative visual analogue scale(VAS)score,cervical spine Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA)score between the two groups(P>0.05).The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,operation cost,and intraoperative complications were recorded and compared between the two groups.The VAS score and cervical spine JOA score were used to evaluate the improvement of pain and cervical spinal cord function before operation and at 1 month after operation.CT examination was performed at 3 days after operation,and the accuracy of screw placement was evaluated according to Neo grading criteria.Results All the 55 patients successfully completed the operation.The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,and operation cost in the robot group were significantly higher than those in the traditional group(P<0.05).A total of 220 Ci and C2 pedicle screws were inserted in the two groups,and 94 were inserted in the robot group,with an accuracy rate of 95.7%,among them,2 were inserted by traditional freehand screw placement due to bleeding caused by intraoperative slip.And 126 pedicle screws were inserted in the traditional group,with an accuracy rate of 87.3%,which was significantly lower than that in the robot group(P<0.05).There were 1 case of venous plexus injury in the robot group and 3 cases in the traditional group,which improved after pressure hemostasis treatment.No other intraoperative complication such as vertebral artery injury or spinal cord injury occurred in both groups.All patients were followed up 4-16 months with an average of 6.6 months,and there was no significant difference in the follow-up time between the two groups(P>0.05).Postoperative neck pain significantly relieved in both groups,and neurological symptoms relieved to varying degrees.The VAS score and cervicle spine JOA score of both groups significantly improved at 1 month after operation when compared with preoperative scores(P<0.05),and there was no significant difference in the score change between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion In the treatment of atlantoaxial dislocation,the accuracy of robot-assisted screw placement is superior to the traditional freedhand screw placement.

Robot-assisted technologyfreehand screw placementatlantoaxial dislocationaccuracy

张海平、郝定均、贺宝荣、许正伟、段永超、杨文龙、李厚坤、寇长江、王科

展开 >

西安交通大学附属红会医院脊柱外科(西安 710054)

西安交通大学附属红会医院术中影像检查科(西安 710054)

西安医学院(西安 710068)

机器人辅助技术 徒手植钉 寰枢椎脱位 精确性

陕西省科技厅重点产业创新链(群)-社会发展领域项目

2023-ZDLSF-03

2024

中国修复重建外科杂志
中国康复医学会,四川大学华西医院

中国修复重建外科杂志

CSTPCD北大核心
影响因子:1.239
ISSN:1002-1892
年,卷(期):2024.38(8)
  • 3