Purpose

To compare the effectiveness of TiRobot-assisted kyphoplasty with that of the traditional fluoroscopy-assisted approach in treating multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we collected data from 71 patients (TiRobot-assisted group, n = 39; fluoroscopy-assisted group, n = 32) with multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture treated with unilateral traditional TiRobot-assisted or fluoroscopy-assisted percutaneous kyphoplasty. The operative time, infusion volume, length of stay (LOS), hospital expenses, visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), radiation exposure, puncture deviation, anterior height of diseased vertebrae, local kyphotic angle, bone cement distribution, and bone cement leakage were compared between the TiRobot- and fluoroscopy-assisted groups.

Results

Of the 257 treated vertebrae, the average amount of bone cement injected in the TiRobot-assisted (142 vertebrae) and fluoroscopy-assisted (115 vertebrae) groups was 4.6 mL and 4.5 mL, respectively. The VAS score was significantly lower in the TiRobot-assisted group at 24 hours post-operatively (p = 0.006). The X-ray frequency was 34.7 times in the TiRobot-assisted group and 51.7 times in the fluoroscopy-assisted group (p < 0.001). In addition to the operative time, cumulative radiation dose for the surgeon and patient was significantly lower in the TiRobot-assisted group. The hospital expenses of the TiRobot-assisted group were significantly higher (p < 0.001). The puncture deviation and bone cement distribution were better in the TiRobot-assisted group (p < 0.001). Bone cement leakage was found in 18 and 29 cases in the TiRobot- and fluoroscopy-assisted groups, respectively (p = 0.010). One patient in the fluoroscopy-assisted group experienced radiculopathy due to a misplaced puncture but recovered in three months. No radiculopathy was observed in the TiRobot-assisted group.

Conclusions

TiRobot-assisted percutaneous multilevel kyphoplasty is more accurate and has smaller radiometry, a more uniform bone cement distribution, and lower bone cement leakage. This method was therefore accurate and safe.

中文翻译：

---

TiRobot辅助经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗多节段（三节段以上）骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折

目的

比较TiRobot辅助椎体后凸成形术与传统透视辅助方法治疗多节段骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折的疗效。

方法

在这项回顾性研究中，我们收集了 71 例患者（TiRobot 辅助组，n  = 39；透视辅助组，n  = 32）的多节段骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折患者的数据，这些患者接受了单侧传统 TiRobot 辅助或透视辅助经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗。手术时间、输液量、住院时间（LOS）、住院费用、视觉模拟量表（VAS）、Oswestry功能障碍指数（ODI）、辐射量、穿刺偏差、病椎前高度、局部后凸角、骨水泥分布和骨水泥渗漏率在 TiRobot 和透视辅助组之间进行了比较。

结果

在 257 根治疗椎骨中，TiRobot 辅助组（142 根椎骨）和透视辅助组（115 根椎骨）的平均骨水泥注射量分别为 4.6 mL 和 4.5 mL。术后 24 小时，TiRobot 辅助组的 VAS 评分显着降低 ( p  = 0.006)。TiRobot 辅助组的 X 线频率为 34.7 次，透视辅助组为 51.7 次（p  < 0.001）。除了手术时间，外科医生和患者的累积辐射剂量在 TiRobot 辅助组中也显着降低。TiRobot 辅助组的住院费用明显更高 ( p  < 0.001)。TiRobot辅助组的​​穿刺偏差和骨水泥分布较好（p  < 0.001）。TiRobot 和透视辅助组分别有 18 例和 29 例发生骨水泥渗漏 ( p  = 0.010)。透视辅助组中的一名患者因穿刺错位而出现神经根病，但在三个月后康复。在 TiRobot 辅助组中未观察到神经根病。

结论

TiRobot 辅助经皮多节段后凸成形术更准确，辐射度更小，骨水泥分布更均匀，骨水泥渗漏更低。因此该方法是准确和安全的。