Abstract：
We compared robotic-assisted scaphoid screw fixation to conventional technique in terms of accuracy, surgical times, radiation exposure, and clinical outcomes, including range of motion, grip strength, functional score, and complications.
This study was a registered, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. From May 2019 to December 2019, 1 surgeon performed 18 robotic-assisted and 18 conventional scaphoid screw fixations and these patients were eligible for participation in this study. Surgical time, including the time of the overall procedure, set-up time, and time for ideal guidewire placement, was recorded. The number of guidewire attempts also was recorded. All patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at follow-up with respect to the severity of pain, wrist motion, grip strength, complications, and Mayo modified wrist score.
The average set-up time and overall time of the procedure were longer in the robotic-assisted than in the conventional groups, while the mean guidewire insertion time and the mean guidewire attempts was less in the robotic-assisted group than that of the conventional group. The overall radiation exposure was lower in the robotic group.
Robotic-assisted technique provided a useful tool to improve implantation accuracy and shorten radiation exposure. Additional cost and prolonged duration of surgery without evidence of improved clinical scores may limit widespread acceptance of this technique.
Therapeutic II.
This study was a registered, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. From May 2019 to December 2019, 1 surgeon performed 18 robotic-assisted and 18 conventional scaphoid screw fixations and these patients were eligible for participation in this study. Surgical time, including the time of the overall procedure, set-up time, and time for ideal guidewire placement, was recorded. The number of guidewire attempts also was recorded. All patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at follow-up with respect to the severity of pain, wrist motion, grip strength, complications, and Mayo modified wrist score.
The average set-up time and overall time of the procedure were longer in the robotic-assisted than in the conventional groups, while the mean guidewire insertion time and the mean guidewire attempts was less in the robotic-assisted group than that of the conventional group. The overall radiation exposure was lower in the robotic group.
Robotic-assisted technique provided a useful tool to improve implantation accuracy and shorten radiation exposure. Additional cost and prolonged duration of surgery without evidence of improved clinical scores may limit widespread acceptance of this technique.
Therapeutic II.
摘要：
我们比较了机器人辅助舟骨螺钉固定与传统技术的准确性，手术次数,辐射暴露,和临床结果，包括运动范围，握力,功能评分，和并发症。
这项研究已注册，prospective,随机化，对照试验。从2019年5月到2019年12月，1名外科医生进行了18次机器人辅助和18次常规舟骨螺钉固定，这些患者有资格参与这项研究。手术时间,包括整个过程的时间，设置时间,和理想的导丝放置时间，被记录下来。还记录了导丝尝试的次数。在随访时对所有患者进行了临床和影像学评估，以评估疼痛的严重程度。手腕运动,握力,并发症,和梅奥修改手腕得分。
与传统组相比，机器人辅助组的平均设置时间和手术总时间更长，而机器人辅助组的平均导丝插入时间和平均导丝尝试次数少于传统组。机器人组的总体辐射暴露较低。
机器人辅助技术提供了一种有用的工具来提高植入精度和缩短辐射暴露。在没有临床评分改善的证据的情况下，额外的费用和手术持续时间延长可能会限制该技术的广泛接受。
治疗II.
这项研究已注册，
与传统组相比，机器人辅助组的平均设置时间和手术总时间更长，
机器人辅助技术提供了一种有用的工具来提高植入精度和缩短辐射暴露。
治疗II.
