Objective
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-guided percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) in treatment of multi-segmental thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF).
Methods
A clinical data of 63 cases with multi-segmental thoracolumbar OVCF without neurologic deficit treated with PKP between October 2017 and February 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into robot-guided group (33 cases) and traditional fluoroscopy group (30 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, fracture segment, bone mineral density, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, midline vertebral height, and Cobb angle between the two groups ( P>0.05). The time to establish the tunnel, the times of fluoroscopy, the dose of fluoroscopy, the deviation of puncture, the distribution of bone cement, the leakage of bone cement, the puncture angle, and the postoperative VAS score, midline vertebral height, and Cobb angle were recorded and compared.
Results
The patients in two groups were followed up 11-13 months (mean, 12 months). Compared with traditional fluoroscopy group, the time to establish the tunnel, the times and dose of fluoroscopy in robot-guided group were significantly lower, the deviation of puncture was slighter, the distribution of bone cement was better, and the puncture angle was larger, the differences between the two groups were significant ( P<0.05). There were 8 segments (9.3%, 8/86) of bone leakage in robot-guided group and 17 segments (22.6%, 17/75) in traditional fluoroscopy group, the difference between the two groups was significant ( χ 2=5.455, P=0.020). There was no significant difference in VAS score, the midline vertebral height, and Cobb angle between the two groups at 2 days after operation and last follow-up ( P>0.05).
Conclusion
Robot-guided PKP in treatment of multi-segmental thoracolumbar OVCF can shorten the operation time, improve the accuracy of puncture, reduce the times and dose of fluoroscopy, reduce the leakage of bone cement, and achieve better cement distribution.
[1]
W. Tian,et al.
Comparison of Superior‐Level Facet Joint Violations Between Robot‐Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement and Conventional Open Fluoroscopic‐Guided Pedicle Screw Placement
,
2019,
Orthopaedic surgery.
[2]
Wei Tian,et al.
Effect of Robot-Assisted Surgery on Lumbar Pedicle Screw Internal Fixation in Patients with Osteoporosis.
,
2019,
World neurosurgery.
[3]
P. Liu,et al.
Accuracy of Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement for Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Comparative Cohort Study
,
2019,
Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research.
[4]
Bo Liu,et al.
Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion in thoracolumbar spinal surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial.
,
2019,
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.
[5]
M. Zong,et al.
Analysis of risk factors causing short-term cement leakages and long-term complications after percutaneous kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
,
2018,
Acta radiologica.
[6]
C. Schizas,et al.
Pedicle Screw Insertion Accuracy Using O-Arm, Robotic Guidance, or Freehand Technique: A Comparative Study
,
2017,
Spine.
[7]
T. Jahng,et al.
Minimally Invasive Robotic Versus Open Fluoroscopic-guided Spinal Instrumented Fusions: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
,
2017,
Spine.
[8]
Kailun Wu,et al.
Review of Percutaneous Kyphoplasty in China
,
2016,
Spine.
[9]
V. Rohde,et al.
Perioperative course and accuracy of screw positioning in conventional, open robotic-guided and percutaneous robotic-guided, pedicle screw placement
,
2011,
European Spine Journal.
[10]
S. Gertzbein,et al.
Accuracy of Pedicular Screw Placement In Vivo
,
1990,
Spine.