Cervical pedicle screw fixation with the Tianji orthopedic surgical robot.

IF 2.8 3区医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research Pub Date : 2025-02-04 DOI:10.1186/s13018-024-05325-3

Hao Shen, Jinlong Zhou, Lipeng Yu

{"title":"Cervical pedicle screw fixation with the Tianji orthopedic surgical robot.","authors":"Hao Shen, Jinlong Zhou, Lipeng Yu","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05325-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the accuracy and safety of implanting cervical pedicle screws (CPS) between orthopedic surgical robot-assisted technique and traditional fluoroscopy-assisted free-hand technique.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 95 patients treated with posterior cervical spinal surgery using either Tianji orthopedic surgical robot-assisted or traditional fluoroscopy-assisted free-hand pedicle screw implantation technology from March 2021 to March 2024, including 44 cases in the orthopedic surgical robot group and 51 cases in the traditional fluoroscopy group.Results: Compared with the traditional fluoroscopy group, the orthopedic surgical robot group had better accuracy in screw implantation that is, a higher acceptable rate of screws (p = 0.0083). In addition, compared with the traditional fluoroscopy group, postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the orthopedic surgical robot group (p = 0.0447), but operation duration was longer (p = 0.0038). There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss between groups (p = 0.0872). There were 2 cases of cerebrospinal fluid leakage and 1 case of decreased left handgrip strength in the traditional fluoroscopy group, while only 1 case of cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in the orthopedic surgical robot group.Conclusions: In this retrospective study, the accuracy of spine surgery with CPS implantation assisted by orthopedic surgical robot is often superior to that of spine surgery using traditional fluoroscopy-guided CPS implantation technique, while maintaining comparable safety.","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"131"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11792645/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05325-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the accuracy and safety of implanting cervical pedicle screws (CPS) between orthopedic surgical robot-assisted technique and traditional fluoroscopy-assisted free-hand technique.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of 95 patients treated with posterior cervical spinal surgery using either Tianji orthopedic surgical robot-assisted or traditional fluoroscopy-assisted free-hand pedicle screw implantation technology from March 2021 to March 2024, including 44 cases in the orthopedic surgical robot group and 51 cases in the traditional fluoroscopy group.

Results: Compared with the traditional fluoroscopy group, the orthopedic surgical robot group had better accuracy in screw implantation that is, a higher acceptable rate of screws (p = 0.0083). In addition, compared with the traditional fluoroscopy group, postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the orthopedic surgical robot group (p = 0.0447), but operation duration was longer (p = 0.0038). There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss between groups (p = 0.0872). There were 2 cases of cerebrospinal fluid leakage and 1 case of decreased left handgrip strength in the traditional fluoroscopy group, while only 1 case of cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in the orthopedic surgical robot group.

Conclusions: In this retrospective study, the accuracy of spine surgery with CPS implantation assisted by orthopedic surgical robot is often superior to that of spine surgery using traditional fluoroscopy-guided CPS implantation technique, while maintaining comparable safety.

查看原文本刊更多论文

使用天基骨科手术机器人进行颈椎椎弓根螺钉固定。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research ORTHOPEDICS-

CiteScore

4.10

自引率

7.70%

发文量

494

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.