Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:4
|
作者
Wang, Xu [1 ]
Liu, Hao-chuan [1 ]
Ma, Yi-hang [1 ]
Zhu, Qing-san [1 ]
Zhu, Yu-hang [1 ]
机构
[1] Jilin Univ, China Japan Union Hosp, Dept Spine Surg, 126 Xiantai St, Changchun, Jilin, Peoples R China
关键词
Robot-assisted; Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; Degenerative lumbar spinal diseases; Meta-analysis; PEDICLE SCREW PLACEMENT; LEARNING-CURVE; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.1007/s11701-023-01768-8
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Robot-assisted (RA) technology has been widely used in spine surgery. This analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of RA minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and fluoroscopy-assisted (FA) MIS-TLIF for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases (DLSD). PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were systematically searched, and the outcomes included surgical parameters [operation time, blood loss, number of fluoroscopic, accuracy of pedicle screw position, superior facet joint violation (FJV)], and clinical indexes (Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, complications). Eleven articles involving 1066 patients were included. RA group produced better results than the FA group in operation time (WMD = - 6.59; 95% CI - 12.79 to - 0.40; P = 0.04), blood loss (WMD = - 34.81; 95% CI - 50.55 to - 19.08; P < 0.0001), number of fluoroscopic (WMD = - 18.24; 95% CI - 30.63 to - 5.85; P = 0.004), accuracy of pedicle screw position: Grade A (OR = 3.16; 95% CI 2.36-4.23; P < 0.00001), Grade B (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54; P < 0.00001), Grade C (OR = 0.27; 95% CI 0.13-0.54; P = 0.0002), and Grade D (OR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.03-0.98; P = 0.05), FJV: Grade 0 (OR = 3.27; 95% CI 1.34-8.02; P = 0.010), Grade 1 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.16-0.38; P < 0.00001), Grade 2 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.12-0.51; P = 0.0002), and Grade 3 (OR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.07-0.93; P = 0.04). But no significant differences in VAS score, ODI, JOA score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, and complications. These results demonstrate a significant improvement in the intraoperative course of the RA technique. However, RA-MIS-TLIF has not yet demonstrated significant advantages in terms of postoperative symptom relief and functional improvement. Future research and clinical practice should further explore the efficacy of this technique to optimize outcomes and quality of life for patients with DLSD. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023454405).
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Interbody Fusion Technique for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Chang, Min Cheol
    Kim, Gang-Un
    Choo, Yoo Jin
    Lee, Gun Woo
    LIFE-BASEL, 2021, 11 (07):
  • [32] Comparison between oblique lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    An, Bochen
    Ren, Bowen
    Han, Zhenchuan
    Mao, Keya
    Liu, Jianheng
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2023, 18 (01)
  • [33] Comparison between oblique lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Bochen An
    Bowen Ren
    Zhenchuan Han
    Keya Mao
    Jianheng Liu
    Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 18
  • [34] Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylosis: A meta-analysis
    Zhang, Bin-Fei
    Ge, Chao-Yuan
    Zheng, Bo-Long
    Hao, Ding-Jun
    MEDICINE, 2016, 95 (40)
  • [35] Learning curve for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review
    Yong Ahn
    Sol Lee
    Woo-Kyung Kim
    Sang-Gu Lee
    European Spine Journal, 2022, 31 : 3551 - 3559
  • [36] Learning curve for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review
    Ahn, Yong
    Lee, Sol
    Kim, Woo-Kyung
    Lee, Sang-Gu
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2022, 31 (12) : 3551 - 3559
  • [37] Comparison between robot-assisted and navigation-guided minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a multicenter study
    Heath, Dennis Chen
    Chang, Hsuan-Kan
    Chang, Chih-Chang
    Yang, Hao-Chien
    Tu, Tsung-Hsi
    Hsu, Bing-Hung
    Lin, Ming-Chin
    Wu, Jau-Ching
    Lin, Chien-Min
    Huang, Wen-Cheng
    Liu, Heng-Wei
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2024, 57 (06)
  • [38] Comparison between minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of multi-segmental lumbar degenerative disease: A systematic evaluation and meta-analysis
    Zhai, Wan-Jing
    Wang, Zhan-Kui
    Liu, Hua-Lv
    Qin, Shi-Lei
    Han, Peng-Fei
    Xu, Yun-Feng
    EXPERIMENTAL AND THERAPEUTIC MEDICINE, 2024, 27 (04)
  • [39] Clinical Outcomes of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Three-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Fan, Guoxin
    Wu, Xinbo
    Yu, Shunzhi
    Sun, Qi
    Guan, Xiaofei
    Zhang, Hailong
    Gu, Xin
    He, Shisheng
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 2016
  • [40] Comparison of complication rates of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review of the literature
    Joseph, Jacob R.
    Smith, Brandon W.
    La Marca, Frank
    Park, Paul
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2015, 39 (04)