机器人辅助椎弓根钉固定治疗颈椎骨折脱位
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.武汉市第四医院;2.江汉大学医学院;3.厦门大学附属福州第二医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:

武汉市卫生局临床医学科研项目


Outcome analysis of robot-assissted pedicle screw insertion in treatment with cervical fracture and dislocated injury
Author:
Affiliation:

1.Wuhan Fourth Hospital;2.Medical College of Jianghan University;3.Fuzhou Second Hospital,Xiamen University

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的 比较经肌间隙入路“天玑”机器人导航辅助置钉技术与徒手颈椎椎弓根钉置入治疗颈椎骨折脱位的疗效与安全性。方法 回顾性分析我院2016年1月-2020年1月收治的32例颈椎骨折脱位的临床资料,根据医患沟通结果,14例采用“天玑”机器人导航辅助置钉(机器人组),18例采用传统徒手置钉(传统组)。记录并比较两组患者围手术期资料,临床效果评价及影像学评价指标。结果 两组患者均顺利完成完成手术,术中均无神经、血管、食管损伤等。机器人组手术时间、术中出血量、透视次数、置钉成功率及患者住院时间等均显著优于传统组(P<0.05)。机器人组患者术后切口均顺利愈合。传统组患者术后3例出现脂肪液化,两组切口并发症发生率的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。所有患者均获随访,随访时间平均(27.35±4.37)个月。两组完全负重活动时间的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术前VAS评分及JOA评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。随时间推移,两组患者VAS评分均显著减少(P<0.05),而JOA评分显著增加(P<0.05),ASIA评级显著改善。随访过程中,两组JOA评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在术后3个月及6个月时,机器人组VAS评分显著优于传统组(P<0.05),其他时间点,两组间VAS评分差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。影像方面,机器人组螺钉位于“绝对安全区”及“相对安全区”的比率显著高于传统组(P<0.05);两组患者术前颈椎Cobb角及最小椎管失状径差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但在术后均得到明显恢复(P<0.05)。两组患者在术后16个月均达到骨性融合,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 与徒手置入颈椎椎弓根钉手术方式相比,“天玑”机器人导航辅助置钉可以有效缩短手术时间,减少手术创伤,提高置钉准确率,利于患者术后康复。

    Abstract:

    Abstract Objective To compare the effectiveness and safety between TINAVI navigated and free-handed pedicle screw insertion through posterior paraspinal approach in treatment with lower cervical fracture and dislocated injury. Methods 32 case files involving treatment with cervical fracture and dislocated injury in a posterior approach were collected from January 2016 to January 2020 in a retrospective research. Paients were devided into two groups according to different surgical procedures. In group A, cervical pedicle screws were placed by conventional free-handed technique, while in group B, screws were inserted with the assisstance of TINAVI navigation system. Perioperative data, follow-up outcome and fluoroscopic files of both groups were analysized. Results Surgical operations in both groups were carried out successfully, without nerve, vascular or esophagus injury. The operation time, blood loss, frequency of explosed to radiation and lengh of hospital stay were significantly less in Robot group(P<0.05). No wound complications occurred in the robot group, while in the conventional group, 3 patients suffered fat liquefaction and were finally cured by anti-infection and wound dressing. The mean time of follow up was 27.35±4.37 months. Time differentce of totally weight bearing in both groups was not statistically signicant(P>0.05). The pre-operative VAS and JOA scores in both group were not significantly different(P>0.05). While in the following-up duration, JOA socres in both groups were not statistically different(P>0.05). The ASIA degrees improved. Patients in both groups achieved neural function improvement at different levels by the last follow up. Bony fusion occurred in both groups in 16 weeks after operation, with no significant statistic difference(P>0.05). The pre-operative cervical Cobb angle and minimum sagital diameter in both groups were not significantly different(P>0.05), while recovered, with signidicant stastic difference when compared with data of pre-operation. Conclusion Compared with conventional free-handed pedicle screw insertion, TINAVI navigation takes more advantages in less surgical injury and more accuracy in screw insertion, resulting in an effective method in mini-invasive spinal surgery.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2022-08-16
  • 最后修改日期:2022-09-17
  • 录用日期:2022-11-07
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: