[Effectiveness analysis of 5G remote robotic surgery in pelvic fracture treatment].

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of 5G remote robotic surgery in the treatment of pelvic fractures.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 160 patients with pelvic fractures admitted between July 2023 and June 2024 who met the selection criteria. Among these patients, 80 underwent internal fixation surgery with the assistance of 5G remote robotic surgery (5G group), while 80 received local robotic surgical assistance (control group). Baseline characteristics, including gender, age, body mass index, disease duration, cause of injury, and fracture classification, were compared between the two groups, and no significant difference was found ( P>0.05). The incision length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, accuracy of screw placement, maximum residual displacement postoperatively, quality of fracture reduction, incidence of complications, Majeed pelvic function score and classification at last follow-up were recorded and compared between the two groups.

Results: In the 5G group, 180 screws were implanted during surgery, while 213 screws were implanted in the control group. The 5G group demonstrated significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss and shorter incision length compared to the control group ( P<0.05). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of operation time or hospital stay ( P>0.05). Radiographic evaluation revealed excellent and good reduction rates of 98.8% (79/80) in the 5G group and 97.5% (78/80) in the control group, while excellent and good screw placement accuracy rates were 98.3% (177/180) in the 5G group and 95.8% (204/213) in the control group. No significant difference was found between the two groups in maximum residual displacement, reduction quality, or screw placement accuracy ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 7-16 months (mean, 11.3 months), with no significant difference in follow-up duration between the groups ( P>0.05). No perioperative or follow-up complication, such as wound infection, iatrogenic fractures, iatrogenic neurovascular injury, screw loosening or breakage, or nonunion, were observed in either group. The control group exhibited a worse degree of gait alteration compared to the 5G group ( P<0.05), while no significant difference was found in incidences of squatting limitation or persistent pain ( P>0.05). At last follow-up, no significant difference was observed between the groups in Majeed pelvic function scores or grading ( P>0.05).

Conclusion: Compared with the local surgery group, 5G remote robotic surgery supported by remote expert technical guidance demonstrated smaller incision lengths, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer postoperative complications, and was shown to be a precise, minimally invasive, safe, and reliable surgical method.