机器人辅助导航下骶髂螺钉置入的准确性

Accuracy of sacroiliac screw placement in robot-assisted navigation

背景:骨科机器人已广泛应用于临床,已有相关报道证明其具有创伤小、手术时间短等众多优点,但其置钉准确性暂时尚无明确报道。目的:评估机器人辅助下骶髂螺钉置入的准确性。方法:回顾性收集甘肃省人民医院创伤外科2020年1月至2023年4月收治的骶髂关节骨折脱位、骶骨骨折患者的病历资料,共计131例,其中S_(1)螺钉131枚,S_(2)螺钉46枚,合计螺钉177枚。按照是否行机器人辅助分为2组,观察组63例行机器人辅助导航下置入骶髂螺钉,男36例、女27例,年龄19-72岁,平均(45.3±17.6)岁,其中单纯S_(1)螺钉固定39例、S_(1)S_(2)螺钉均固定24例,合计骶髂螺钉数目87枚;对照组68例行C臂透视下徒手置入骶髂螺钉,男41例、女27例,年龄23-67岁,平均(42.6±21.3)岁,其中单纯S_(1)螺钉固定46例、S_(1)S_(2)螺钉均固定22例,合计骶髂螺钉数目90枚。术后CT扫描,依据SMITH等方法评估S_(1)螺钉数、S_(2)螺钉数、总螺钉数等级并计算置钉准确率。结果与结论:①观察组S_(1)螺钉准确置钉62枚(62/63),准确率为98%;S_(2)螺钉准确置钉24枚(24/24),准确率100%;总螺钉数准确置钉86枚(86/87),准确率99%;②对照组S_(1)螺钉准确置钉58枚(58/68),准确率85%,S_(2)螺钉准确置钉19枚(19/22),准确率86%;总螺钉数准确置钉77枚(77/90),准确率86%;③两组患者S_(1)螺钉准确率、S_(2)螺钉准确率、总螺钉准确率比较差异均有显著性意义(P<0.05)。提示机器人辅助导航下置入骶髂螺钉比C臂透视下徒手置钉具有更高的准确性,但仍有着较低的置钉失误率。

BACKGROUND:Orthopedic robots have been widely used in clinical practice,and relevant reports have shown that they have many advantages such as minimal trauma and short surgical time.However,there is currently no clear report on how accurate they are.OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the accuracy of robot-assisted sacroiliac screw insertion.METHODS:A total of 131 patients with sacroiliac joint fracture and dislocation and sacral fracture admitted to the Department of Trauma Surgery,Gansu Provincial Hospital from January 2020 to April 2023 were retrospectively collected,including 131 S_(1)screws and 46 S_(2)screws,totaling 177 screws.They were divided into two groups based on whether robot-assisted navigation was performed.There were 63 cases of sacroiliac screws inserted under robot-assisted navigation(observation group),with 36 males and 27 females,aged 19-72 years,with a mean age of(45.3±17.6)years.Among them,39 cases were fixed with only S_(1)screws,while 24 cases were fixed with S_(1)S_(2)screws,resulting in a total of 87 sacroiliac screws.Under C-arm fluoroscopy,68 cases of sacroiliac screws were inserted with bare hands(control group),including 41 males and 27 females,aged 23-67 years,with a mean age of(42.6±21.3)years.Among them,46 cases were fixed with simple S_(1)screws,while 22 cases were fixed with S_(1)S_(2)screws,resulting in a total of 90 sacroiliac screws.A postoperative CT scan was performed to evaluate the number of S_(1)screws,S_(2)screws,total screw level,and calculate accuracy based on the method introduced by SMITH et al.RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:(1)In the observation group,62 S_(1)screws were accurately placed(62/63),with an accuracy rate of 98%.24 S_(2)screws were accurately placed(24/24),with an accuracy rate of 100%.The total number of screws accurately placed was 86(86/87),with an accuracy rate of 99%.(2)In the control group,58 S_(1)screws were accurately inserted(58/68),with an accuracy rate of 85%.19 S_(2)screws were accurately inserted(19/22),with an accuracy rate of 86%.The total number of screws accurately inserted was 77(77/90),with an accuracy rate of 86%.(3)There was a statistically significant difference in the accuracy of the S_(1)screw,S_(2)screw,and total screw between the two groups(P<0.05).It is suggested that the placement of sacroiliac screws under robot navigation has higher accuracy compared to manual placement under C-arm fluoroscopy,but still has a lower error rate in placement.