Comparative study of orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery and open surgery for limb osteoid osteoma / 中国修复重建外科杂志

OBJECTIVE@#To compare the accuracy and effectiveness of orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for limb osteoid osteoma.@*METHODS@#A clinical data of 36 patients with limb osteoid osteomas admitted between June 2016 and June 2023 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 16 patients underwent orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (robot-assisted surgery group), and 20 patients underwent tumor resection after lotcated by C-arm X-ray fluoroscopy (open surgery group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the gender, age, lesion site, tumor nidus diameter, and preoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores ( P>0.05). The operation time, lesion resection time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, lesion resection accuracy, and postoperative analgesic use frequency were recorded and compared between the two groups. The VAS scores for pain severity were compared preoperatively and at 3 days and 3 months postoperatively.@*RESULTS@#Compared with the open surgery group, the robot-assisted surgery group had a longer operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, less fluoroscopy frequency, less postoperative analgesic use frequency, and higher lesion resection accuracy ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in lesion resection time ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up after surgery, with a follow-up period of 3-24 months (median, 12 months) in the two groups. No postoperative complication such as wound infection or fracture occurred in either group during follow-up. No tumor recurrence was observed during follow-up. The VAS scores significantly improved in both groups at 3 days and 3 months after surgery when compared with preoperative value ( P<0.05). The VAS score at 3 days after surgery was significantly lower in robot-assisted surgery group than that in open surgery group ( P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in VAS scores at 3 months between the two groups ( P>0.05).@*CONCLUSION@#Compared with open surgery, robot-assisted resection of limb osteoid osteomas has longer operation time, but the accuracy of lesion resection improve, intraoperative blood loss reduce, and early postoperative pain is lighter. It has the advantages of precision and minimally invasive surgery.

Orthopaedic robot-assisted free vascularised fibular grafting for the treatment of avascular necrosis of the femoral head / 中华显微外科杂志

To introduce the surgical procedure of orthopaedic robot-assisted vascularised fibular grafting for the treatment of ANFH and report the short-term result. Methods From September, 2016 to November, 2018, 17 patients (21 hips) with ANFH had undergone robot-assisted free fibular grafting. There were 14 males and 3 females, of which, 8 cases were associated with the right side, 5 cases the left side, and 4 cases with both sides. The average age was 35 (ranged from 17 to 55) years. There were 7 patients suffered from idiopathic ischemic necrosis of femoral head, 4 patients who had cannulated screws fixed after a femoral neck fracture, 4 patients who had a history of alcohol consumption, 1 patient who had taken corticosteroids for 6 months to treat nephritis, and 1 patient who had a history of alcohol consumption and had also taken corticosteroids. Seventeen hips were in Ficat stage II, and 4 hips were in Ficat stage III. The orthopaedic surgical robot workstation was used to plan the entry point and target of the guide pin during the operation, to place a cannula in the optimal position. Then a bone window was created and the fibula was placed into the bone tunnel.Using fluoroscopy to monitor each step of the procedure and verify the position of the fibula. Finally, the vessels were anastomosed. The patient remain in bed completely for a week with the use of vasodilator. The follow-up was accomplished with phone call and outpatient clinic, and Harris score was evaluated. Results All 21 surgical procedures were successful. The guide pins and fibula were accurately placed according to the robot’s plan, and the tips of the fibula were placed at the centre of the load-bearing region of the femoral heads, 4 to 6 mm from the articular surface. Conventional anticoagulant, anti-infective therapy was performed after the pro-cedure. Ten patients were followed-up postoperatively more than 1 year, with an average of 15 (from 12 to 24) months. The function of the hip joint recovered smoothly for 9 patients.Frontal and lateral X-ray and CT scans showed that the tips of the fibula were placed at the centre of the load-bearing region, 4 to 6 mm from the articular surface.One patient suffered from bilateral femoral head necrosis and the right side recovered smoothly after operation.However, joint move-ment was restricted for the left hip and the pain was significant.An arthroscopic examination was performed 1 month after the operation and did not identify any problems such as intraarticular incular infection or articular surface of the femoral head was protruded by the tip of the fibula.The symptoms were alleviated after removing the osteophytes at the rim of the acetabulum.The Harris score was 62.4±13.6 before operation, and 84.5±4.5 at the last time of followed-up after opera-tion.The difference in Harris scores was statisticly significant (P＜0.05). Conclusion With the assistance of an or-thopaedic robot system, the guide pin can be accurately positioned, thereby allowing the tip of the fibula to be inserted in-to the optimal anatomical position and maximising its mechanical efficacy.In theory, it is the best choice for performing fibular bone transplantation in ANFH.And the early effect of treatment is good.