首页|期刊导航|中国骨伤|AO分型下机器人与传统经皮螺钉治疗腰椎骨折疗效比较

AO分型下机器人与传统经皮螺钉治疗腰椎骨折疗效比较OA

Comparison of clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and conventional percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for lumbar fractures based on the AO classification

中文摘要英文摘要

目的:比较机器人辅助经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定与传统经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗腰椎骨折的短期疗效,并基于AO分型分层评估不同稳定性骨折的术式获益差异.方法:回顾性分析2023年1月至2024年12月收治的单节段腰椎骨折患者47例,按AO分型分为稳定型骨折A1/A2型22例与不稳定型骨折A3/B1-B2型25例;按术式分为机器人辅助经皮组(机器人组)与传统经皮组(传统组),稳定型骨折中机器人组10例,传统组12例;不稳定型骨折中机器人组11例,传统组14例.比较两组围手术期指标(手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间)、腰痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)、Oswestry 功能障碍指数(Oswestry disability index,ODI)以及伤椎前缘高度(anterior verte-bral height,AVH).结果:所有患者随访12个月.稳定型骨折中,机器人组术中出血量(23.50±7.47)mL少于传统组(32.50±9.65)mL,差异有统计学意义(P=0.026),而两组手术时间、术后住院时间、手术前后不同时间VAS、ODI和AVH比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).不稳定型骨折中,机器人组手术时间(64.09±11.36)min、术中出血量(27.73±12.92)mL、术后住院时间(5.91±1.45)d,均优于传统组(77.86±18.78)min、(46.79±20.34)mL、(7.64±2.02)d,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后1 d机器人组VAS为(2.27±0.79)分低于传统组(3.43±0.94)分,差异有统计学意义(P=0.003);但术后12个月两组VAS比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.159);机器人组术后1 d的ODI为(26.55±6.56)分、术后12个月(8.27±2.10)分,均优于传统组的(41.64±12.11)、(13.57±4.03)分,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);机器组术后 1d 的 AVH 为(2.41±0.56)cm、术后 12 个月(2.22±0.55)cm,高于传统组的(2.02±0.31)、(1.87±0.30)cm,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论:对于不稳定型腰椎骨折(A3/B1-B2),机器人辅助经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定可获得更优的短期镇痛、功能恢复、椎体高度重建及部分围手术期结局;对于稳定型骨折(A1/A2),两种术式的临床和影像学疗效总体相当,但机器人术式具有减少术中出血的围手术期优势.

Objective To compare the short-term efficacy of robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw fixation versus tra-ditional percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in treating lumbar vertebral fractures,and to evaluate the differences in surgical benefits for different types of stable fractures based on AO classification.Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 47 patients with single-segment lumbar vertebral fractures admitted between January 2023 and December 2024.Patients were classified by AO type as stable fractures(A1/A2:22 cases)or unstable fractures(A3/B1-B2:25 cases);by surgical approach as robot-assisted percutaneous group(robot group)or conventional percutaneous group(traditional group).Among stable fractures,the robot group comprised 10 cases and the conventional group 12 cases;among unstable fractures,the robot group included 11 cases and the conventional group 14 cases.Perioperative parameters(operational time,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative hospitalization duration),visual analogue scale(VAS),Oswestry disability index(ODI),and anterior vertebral height(AVH)were compared between the two groups.Results All patients were followed up for 12 months.In stable fractures,the robot group exhibited significantly lower intraoperative blood loss(23.50±7.47)mL compared to the conventional group(32.50±9.65)mL(P=0.026),whereas no statistically significant differences were observed in operative time,postoperative hospitalization duration,VAS,ODI,and AVH scores at different time points before and after surgery between the two groups(all P>0.05).In unstable fractures,the robot group demonstrated superior surgical duration(64.09±11.36)min,intraoperative blood loss(27.73±12.92)mL,and postoperative hospitalization time(5.91±1.45)days compared to the conventional group(77.86±18.78)min,(46.79±20.34)mL,and(7.64±2.02)days,respectively,with all differences being statistically significant(P<0.05).On day 1 postoperatively,the VAS in the robotic group was(2.27±0.79)scores,significantly lower than that of the conventional group(3.43±0.94)scores(P=0.003),although no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups at the 12 month after surgery(P=0.159).The ODI at day 1 and 12 months postoperatively were(26.55±6.56)and(8.27±2.10)respectively in the robot group,both significantly better than those of the conventional group(41.64±12.11)and(13.57±4.03),respectively(P<0.05).The AVH measurements at day 1 and 12 months postoperatively were(2.41±0.56)cm and(2.22±0.55)cm in the robot group,significantly higher than those of the conventional group(2.02±0.31)cm and(1.87±0.30)cm,respectively(P<0.05).Conclusion For unstable lumbar fractures(A3/B1-B2),robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw fixation provides superior short-term analgesia,functional recovery,vertebral height reconstruction,and certain perioper-ative outcomes;for stable fractures(A1/A2),the clinical and imaging outcomes of both techniques are generally comparable,but the robotic approach offers perioperative advantages in reducing intraoperative bleeding.

蔡海平;许文斌;葛畅;段丽群;陈曦;张文志;郭秀武

中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001中国科学技术大学附属第一医院安徽省立医院先导医学与前沿技术研究所骨科,安徽 合肥 230001

医药卫生

机器人外科手术椎弓根螺钉脊柱骨折腰椎治疗结果回顾性研究

Robotic surgical proceduresPedicle screwsSpinal fracturesLumbar vertebraeTreatment out-comeRetrospective studies

《中国骨伤》 2026 (8)

762-769,8

合肥综合性国家科学中心先导医学与前沿技术研究所项目(编号:2025IHM02014)Centre for Leading Medicine and Advanced Technologies of IHM(No.2025IHM02014)

10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20251014

评论