Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of two surgical methods for lumbar degenerative diseases;the combination of the concept of accelerated rehabilitation with the assistance of Tianji Robotics and the c...Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of two surgical methods for lumbar degenerative diseases;the combination of the concept of accelerated rehabilitation with the assistance of Tianji Robotics and the concept of accelerated rehabilitation combined with manual pedicle screw placement assisted by conventional C-arm fluoroscopy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 70 patients who received the concept of accelerated rehabilitation combined with spinal surgery for lumbar degenerative diseases in Baise People’s Hospital from January 2022 to January 2024. Among them, 35 patients in the robot group received accelerated rehabilitation concept combined with robot-assisted surgery;In the conventional C-arm group, 35 patients received the accelerated rehabilitation concept combined with manual pedicle screw placement assisted by conventional C-arm fluoroscopy. VAS score (preoperative/postoperative), ODI score (preoperative/postoperative), intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications and the accuracy rate of screw placement were compared between the two groups. Result: There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative VAS scores between the robot group and the conventional C-arm group (6.45 ± 0.82 VS 6.63 ± 0.81, P = 0.6600). The postoperative VAS score of the robot group was better than that of the conventional C-arm group (1.69 ± 0.80 VS 2.45 ± 0.85, P = 0.0000*). There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative ODI scores between the robot group and the conventional C-arm group (32.11 ± 3.18 VS 31.66 ± 2.25, P = 0.4900). The postoperative ODI score of the robot group was better than that of the conventional C-arm group (22.68 ± 1.94 VS 24.57 ± 2.25, P = 0.0000*). The postoperative complications in the robot group were less than those in the conventional C-arm group (2.7778% VS 28.5724%, P = 0.0030*). The intraoperative bleeding in the robot group was lower than that in the conventional C-arm group (320.85 ± 276.28 VS 490.00 ± 395.34, P = 0.0420*). The postoperative hospital stay of the robot group was shorter than that of the conventional C-arm group (10.00 ± 9.32 VS 14.49 ± 7.55, P = 0.0300*). The screw placement inaccuracy score of the robot group was lower than that of the conventional C-arm group (0.17 ± 0.51 VS 1.45 ± 1.46, P = 0.0000*). Conclusion: The combination of the concept of accelerated rehabilitation and Tianji Orthopedic robot-assisted surgery is more effective and safer in posterior lumbar decompression and internal fixation surgery with a screw rod system, and is worthy of promotion and application.展开更多
文摘Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of two surgical methods for lumbar degenerative diseases;the combination of the concept of accelerated rehabilitation with the assistance of Tianji Robotics and the concept of accelerated rehabilitation combined with manual pedicle screw placement assisted by conventional C-arm fluoroscopy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 70 patients who received the concept of accelerated rehabilitation combined with spinal surgery for lumbar degenerative diseases in Baise People’s Hospital from January 2022 to January 2024. Among them, 35 patients in the robot group received accelerated rehabilitation concept combined with robot-assisted surgery;In the conventional C-arm group, 35 patients received the accelerated rehabilitation concept combined with manual pedicle screw placement assisted by conventional C-arm fluoroscopy. VAS score (preoperative/postoperative), ODI score (preoperative/postoperative), intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications and the accuracy rate of screw placement were compared between the two groups. Result: There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative VAS scores between the robot group and the conventional C-arm group (6.45 ± 0.82 VS 6.63 ± 0.81, P = 0.6600). The postoperative VAS score of the robot group was better than that of the conventional C-arm group (1.69 ± 0.80 VS 2.45 ± 0.85, P = 0.0000*). There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative ODI scores between the robot group and the conventional C-arm group (32.11 ± 3.18 VS 31.66 ± 2.25, P = 0.4900). The postoperative ODI score of the robot group was better than that of the conventional C-arm group (22.68 ± 1.94 VS 24.57 ± 2.25, P = 0.0000*). The postoperative complications in the robot group were less than those in the conventional C-arm group (2.7778% VS 28.5724%, P = 0.0030*). The intraoperative bleeding in the robot group was lower than that in the conventional C-arm group (320.85 ± 276.28 VS 490.00 ± 395.34, P = 0.0420*). The postoperative hospital stay of the robot group was shorter than that of the conventional C-arm group (10.00 ± 9.32 VS 14.49 ± 7.55, P = 0.0300*). The screw placement inaccuracy score of the robot group was lower than that of the conventional C-arm group (0.17 ± 0.51 VS 1.45 ± 1.46, P = 0.0000*). Conclusion: The combination of the concept of accelerated rehabilitation and Tianji Orthopedic robot-assisted surgery is more effective and safer in posterior lumbar decompression and internal fixation surgery with a screw rod system, and is worthy of promotion and application.
