Comparison of application of 3D-printed personalized guiding template and robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in adult degenerative scoliosis
10.3969/j.issn.1004-406X.2024.02.04
- VernacularTitle:3D打印个体化导板与机器人辅助在成人退变性脊柱侧凸椎弓根螺钉置钉中的应用比较
- Author:
Bao ZHU
1
;
Yanjun ZHANG
;
Zhenyuan YANG
Author Information
1. 甘肃省中医院脊柱骨二科 730050兰州市
- Keywords:
Adult degenerative scoliosis;
3D printed guiding template;
Robot assisted;
Pedicle screws
- From:
Chinese Journal of Spine and Spinal Cord
2024;34(2):135-142
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objectives:To compare the effects of 3D-printed personalized guiding template and robot-assisted pedicle screw placements in orthopedic surgery for adult degenerative scoliosis(ADS).Methods:Retrospective analysis was conducted on 18 ADS patients hospitalized and treated with corrective surgery in the department between January 2020 and December 2022.There were 3 males and 15 females,aged 46-73(63.2±8.2)years old.A total of 236 pedicle screws were placed,and the patients were divided into two groups according to the auxiliary screw placement methods:the 3D-printed personalized guiding template group(3D-printed group,1 1 cases,142 pedicle screws were placed)and robot-assisted screw placement group(Robot group,7 cases,94 pedicle screws were placed).The patients were followed up for 6 months and more.The vertex rotation angle and scoliosis Cobb angle were measured and compared between groups before operation.All pedicle screws were classified by Gertzbein-Robbins classification standard at 1 week after operation,and the accuracy and satisfaction of screw placement in the two groups were compared;And the operative time and incidence of complications were also analyzed and compared between the two groups.Re-sults:The 3D-printed group was not statistically different from the robot group in terms of age(63.6±9.0 years vs.62.6±7.3 years),gender ratio(male/female:2/9 vs.1/6),number of screws placed(12.91±3.83 vs.13.43± 3.60),Cobb angle(40.36°±1 1.82° vs.38.14°±12.84°),and vertex rotation angle(30.27°±7.25° vs.29.86°±9.65°),respectively(P＞0.05).The robot group was longer in operative time than that of 3D-printed group(354.29± 53.73min vs.282.27±73.87min,P＜0.05).Of the total 142 pedicle screws placed in the 3D-printed group,128 screws were of class A,10 were of class B,and 4 were of class C;Of the total 94 pedicle screws placed in the robot group,86 screws were of class A,5 were of class B,and 3 were of class C;No class D or E screws in the two groups.The accuracy rate of screw placement(90.14％)and satisfaction rate(97.18％)of the 3D-printed group were not statistically different from the accuracy rate(91.49％)and satisfaction rate(96.81％)of the robot group,respectively(P＞0.05).The incidence of complications in the 3D-printed group(36.36％)was not significantly different from that in the robot group(57.14％,P＞0.05).Conclusions:Both auxiliary screw placement methods can assist spinal surgeons to accurately place screws in ADS patients,but 3D-printed personalized guiding template needs less time in screw placement.
