Object: To compare the safety, clinical efficacy, and complication rate of “Tianji” robot-assisted surgery with traditional open surgery in the treatment of cervical vertebrae fracture. Methods: 60 patients with upper cervical vertebrae fracture admitted to Baise People’s Hospital between November 2018 and April 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Among these patients, 29 underwent “Tianji” robot-assisted surgery (Robot group), and 31 underwent traditional C-arm fluoroscopy-assisted open surgery (Open group). Statistical analysis of the data was performed using SPSS 27.0 software to compare general data (gender, age, BMI), preoperative and postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, neck disability index (NDI), intraoperative blood loss, accuracy of screw placement on imaging, and the number of complications in both groups for comprehensive evaluation. A P value < 0.05 was deemed to have achieved statistical significance. Results: There was no significant difference in preoperative VAS scores between the two groups (Robot group: 8.34 ± 0.61; Open group: 8.26 ± 0.68, P = 0.317). There was also no significant difference in VAS scores at 1 week postoperatively (Robot group: 6.90 ± 0.31; Open group: 6.94 ± 0.36, P = 0.3237). Preoperative NDI scores showed no significant difference between the two groups (Robot group: 43.31 ± 2.67; Open group: 43.84 ± 2.67, P = 0.2227), and the difference in NDI scores at 1 week postoperatively was also not significant (Robot group: 35.69 ± 4.24; Open group: 37.35 ± 3.48, P = 0.0509). Intraoperative blood loss in the Robot group was significantly lower than in the Open group (246.21 ± 209 ml vs 380.65 ± 328.04 ml, P = 0.0308), with a statistically significant difference. The operation time was longer in the Robot group (3.75 ± 0.74 h) compared to the Open group (2.74 ± 0.86 h). In terms of screw placement accuracy, the Robot group had a higher accuracy rate for Class A screws compared to the Open group (102 screws vs 94 screws, P = 0.0487), and the accuracy rate for Class B screws was also higher in the Robot group (13 screws vs 29 screws, P = 0.0333), with both differences being statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the number of complications between the two groups (Robot group: 8 cases; Open group: 10 cases, P = 0.6931). Conclusion: Patients treated with “Tianji” robot-assisted surgery for upper cervical vertebrae fracture had lower intraoperative blood loss and higher screw placement
References
[1]
Su, L., Zhou, Y.J., Wang, Y., et al. (2024) The Research Progress in Surgical Treatment of Cervical Spine Fractures and Dislocations. Chinese Journal of Spine and Spinal Cord, 34, 438-443.
Zhu, B., Zhang, Y.J., Yang, Z.Y., et al. (2024) Comparison of Personalized 3D Printed Guide and Robot-Assisted Screw Fixation for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis Vertebral Pedicle Screw Placement. Chinese Journal of Spine and Spinal Cord, 34, 135-142.
[4]
Zhao, T., Huang, C.K. and Su, G.S. (2024) Application Effect of Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement and Conventional Open Pedicle Screw Placement in Lumbar Vertebral Fractures. Minimally Invasive Medicine, 19, 19-26.
[5]
Liu, Y., Zhao, Z.G., Wang, X., et al. (2022) Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Fixation for the Treatment of Cervical Spine Fracture and Dislocation. Chinese Journal of Orthopedics, 30, 1941-1946.
[6]
Liu, S., Lei, T.H., Gu, F., et al. (2024) Review on the Application of Tianji Orthopedic Surgical Robot in the Field of Traumatic Orthopedics. Medical Equipment, 45, 104-110.
[7]
Yin, Y.B., Wang, Z.X., Yi, Z., et al. (2023) Introduction to the Tianji Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Screw Internal Fixation Technique for Quadrangular Fusion. Journal of Restorative and Reconstructive Surgery in China, 37, 764-766.
[8]
Yang, C.Z., Liu, G., Tang, J.L. et al. (2022) Percutaneous Iliosacral Hollow Screw Internal Fixation Assisted by Tianji Orthopedic Robot in the Treatment of Posterior Pelvic Ring Injuries Combined with Sacral Bone Deformity. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 36, 940-945.
[9]
Zheng, S., Wang, B., Han, Z.C., et al. (2022) Efficacy Observation of the “Tianji” Orthopedic Surgical Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Simple Isthmic Spondylolysis. Journal of the Chinese PLA Medical School, 43, 617-621.
[10]
Liu, Y.J., Wang, Z.D., Xu, C., et al. (2023) Minimally Invasive Treatment of Elderly Garden II, III Type Femoral Neck Fractures with Tianji Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Dynamic Locking Nail System: Early Clinical Efficacy. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 37, 1471-1476.
[11]
Ma, M.Z., Wang, Z.C., Ye, J.W. and Chen, X. (2023) Efficacy Analysis of “Tianji” Orthopedic Robot-Assisted and Manual Pedicle Screw Fixation for Thoracic Vertebral Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures Surgery. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 37, 1106-1112.
[12]
Liu, K.X., You, M.Z., Huang, M.R., et al. (2022) Preliminary Application of Tianji Orthopedic Robot Combined with Artis Zeego System for Minimally Invasive Treatment of Pelvic Fractures. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 36, 929-933.
[13]
Lin, S., Tang, L.Y., Wang, F., et al. (2023) Tirobot-Assisted Percutaneous Kyphoplasty in the Management of Multilevel (More Than Three Levels) Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture. International Orthopaedics, 47, 319-327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05580-1
[14]
Zhu, Z.D., Xiao, C.W., Tan, B., et al. (2021) Tirobot-Assisted Percutaneous Cannulated Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fractures: A Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up of 50 Patients. Orthopaedic Surgery, 13, 244-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12915
[15]
Mao, J.Z., Soliman, M., Karamian, B.A., et al. (2023) Anatomical and Technical Considerations of Robot-Assisted Cervical Pedicle Screw Placement: A Cadaveric Study. Global Spine Journal, 13, 1992-2000. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682211068410
