ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Visual instruments are essential to ensure high-quality surgical outcomes for minimally invasive procedures and have gradually become the focus of research. Recently, a novel visual auxiliary instrument, a 3-dimensional exoscope (EX), has been applied for spinal surgery. However, its advantages over other auxiliary means (OAMs) in anterior cervical surgery need to be assessed. OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the clinical outcomes of EX and OAMs in anterior cervical spine surgery using a meta-analysis and to provide the latest clinical evidence. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Database were systematically reviewed for relevant literature published prior to January 21, 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed bias risk in the included literature. Review Manager software (version 5.4; the Cochrane Collaboration) was used to conduct the meta-analysis. RESULTS: five studies, one prospective and four retrospective cohort studies, with a total of 349 patients (154 in the EX group and 195 in the OAMs group) were included. A meta-analysis showed that compared to OAMs, EX-assisted anterior cervical spine surgery resulted in less intraoperative hemorrhage [WMD = -8.96, 95% CI (-14.21, -3.71), P = 0.0008]. Nevertheless, no significant differences in VAS scores, JOA scores, operation time, hospitalization time, and complication rate were observed between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: EX and OAMs are equally safe and effective for anterior cervical spine surgery; however, compared to OAMs, EX results in less intraoperative hemorrhage.