Comparative analysis of the pedicle screw accuracy, screw revision and loosening rate and radiation exposure of robotic-guided (RG), intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)-navigation guided, and fluoroscopy guided placement technique

对机器人引导(RG)、术中计算机断层扫描(iCT)导航引导和透视引导下椎弓根螺钉置入技术的精度、螺钉翻修率和松动率以及辐射暴露量进行比较分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective single-center study aimed to compare the accuracy and revision rates of pedicle screw (PS) placement using robot-guided (RG), intraoperative CT-navigated (iCT-nav), and fluoroscopy-guided (FG) techniques. Additionally, screw loosening and overall revision rates were assessed across all three methods. METHODS: Data from 237 consecutive patients who underwent PS placement using iCT-nav, FG, or RG were analyzed. Each PS was evaluated in intraoperative or postoperative CT and classified using the Gertzbein-Robbins Scale (GRS). Follow-up CT to assess fusion and screw loosening was performed at a median of 8 months (IQR = 5-17). RESULTS: A total of 1352 PS were placed: 444 with RG, 667 with FG, and 241 with iCT-nav. RG showed the highest rate of GRS A screws (91.7 %) compared to iCT-nav (86.2 %) and FG (80.5 %). The iCT-nav group had the lowest revision rate due to loosening (p < 0.001), while the FG group showed the highest revision rates due to misplacement (p < 0.001) and loosening (p = 0.001). Radiation exposure (effective dose, ED) was significantly lower in the iCT group compared to the FG group. CONCLUSION: RG PS placement demonstrates superior accuracy compared to iCT-nav and FG. Furthermore, intraoperative CT imaging significantly reduces total radiation exposure for patients.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。