Objective: To investigate short-term effectiveness and clinical application advantages of orthopedic robot-assisted resection for osteoid osteoma compared with traditional open surgery.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data of 48 osteoid osteoma patients who met the selection criteria between July 2022 and April 2023. Among them, 23 patients underwent orthopedic robot-assisted resection (robot-assisted surgery group), and 25 patients received traditional open surgery (traditional surgery group). There was no significant difference ( P>0.05) in gender, age, disease duration, lesion location and size, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and musculoskeletal tumor society (MSTS) score between the two groups. The surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative lesion localization time, initial localization success rate, infection, and recurrence were recorded and compared. VAS scores before surgery and at 24 hours, 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery and MSTS score before surgery and at 3 months after surgery were assessed.
Results: All patients completed the surgery successfully, with no significant difference in surgical time between the two groups ( P>0.05). Compared to the traditional surgery group, the robot-assisted surgery group had less intraoperative blood loss, shorter lesion localization time, and shorter hospitalization time, with significant differences ( P<0.05). The initial localization success rate was higher in the robot-assisted surgery group than in the traditional surgery group, but the difference between the two groups was not significant ( P>0.05). All patients in both groups were followed up, with the follow-up time of 3-12 months in the robot-assisted surgery group (median, 6 months) and 3-14 months in the traditional surgery group (median, 6 months). The postoperative MSTS scores of both groups improved significantly when compared to those before surgery ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the changes in MSTS scores between the two groups ( P>0.05). The postoperative VAS scores of both groups showed a gradually decreasing trend over time ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups after surgery ( P>0.05). During follow-up, except for 1 case of postoperative infection in the traditional surgery group, there was no infections or recurrences in other cases. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative infection between the two groups ( P>0.05).
Conclusion: Orthopedic robot-assisted osteoid osteoma resection achieves similar short-term effectiveness when compared to traditional open surgery, with shorter lesion localization time.
目的: 通过与传统开放手术比较，探讨骨科机器人辅助骨样骨瘤切除的早期疗效以及临床应用优势。.
方法: 回顾性分析2022年7月—2023年4月符合选择标准的48例骨样骨瘤患者临床资料，其中23例接受骨科机器人辅助骨样骨瘤切除手术（机器人辅助手术组），25例行传统开放手术（传统手术组）。两组患者性别、年龄、病程、病灶部位及最大径、术前疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）及美国肌肉骨骼肿瘤学会（MSTS）评分比较，差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。记录并比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术中病灶定位时间与初次定位成功率、住院时间以及术后感染、肿瘤复发情况；术前以及术后24 h，1、3、6、9个月 VAS评分，术前及术后3个月MSTS评分。.
结果: 两组手术均顺利完成，手术时间差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。与传统手术组相比，机器人辅助手术组术中出血量减少、病灶定位时间及住院时间均缩短，差异有统计学意义（ P<0.05）；初次定位成功率更高，但差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。两组患者均获随访，其中机器人辅助手术组随访时间3～12个月，中位时间6个月；传统手术组为3～14个月，中位时间6个月。两组术后MSTS评分均较术前改善（ P<0.05），但组间MSTS评分变化值差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。两组术后VAS评分均随时间延长呈逐渐降低趋势（ P<0.05），但术后两组间比较差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。随访期间，除传统手术组1例发生术后感染外，其余均未发生感染及肿瘤复发；两组术后感染发生率差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。.
结论: 与传统开放手术相比，骨科机器人辅助下骨样骨瘤切除术不仅能获得相似早期疗效，且术中病灶定位时间更短。.
Keywords: Osteoid osteoma; case-control study; open surgery; orthopedic robot.