ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and open freehand TLIF for the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DSL) and analyse the influence on postoperative adjacent segmental degeneration (ASD). Methods The clinical data of 116 patients with L4、5 DLS who were admitted between November 2019 and October 2021 and met the selection criteria were retrospectively analyzed. According to the surgical methods, they were divided into the robotic group (45 cases, who underwent robot-assisted MIS-TLIF) and the open group (71 cases, who underwent open freehand TLIF). There was no significant difference in baseline data such as gender, age, body mass index, DLS Meyerding grading, and preoperative Pfirrmann grading, Weishaupt grading, L3, 4 intervertebral disc height (DH), L3, 4 intervertebral mobility, sagittal parameters [including pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT)], and Cage height (P>0.05). The grade of facet joint violation (FJV) by pedicle screws on the superior articular process was assessed postoperatively. Sagittal parameters, L3, 4 DH, L3, 4 DH loss, and L3, 4 intervertebral mobility were measured preoperatively and at last follow-up in order to determine whether ASD occurred. Based on the occurrence of postoperative ASD, logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for ASD after TLIF. Results Patients in both groups were followed up 21-47 months, with a mean of 36.1 months; there was no significant difference in the follow-up time between the two groups (P>0.05). The occurrence of postoperative FJV was significantly better in the robotic group than in the open group (P<0.05). At last follow-up, the difference in the change values of sagittal parameters PI, PT, SS, and LL was not significant when comparing the two groups of patients (P>0.05); the change values of L3, 4 DH and L3, 4 DH loss in the robotic group were smaller than those in the open group, and the change value of L3, 4 intervertebral mobility was larger than that in the open group, and the differences were significant (P<0.05). At last follow-up, ASD occurred in 8 patients (17.8%) in the robotic group and 35 patients (49.3%) in the open group, and the difference in ASD incidence between the two groups was significant (P<0.05). logistic regression analysis showed that open surgery, preoperative Pfirrmann grading Ⅳ-Ⅴ, preoperative Weishaupt grading ≥2, and postoperative FJV grading ≥1 were risk factors for the development of ASD after TLIF (P<0.05). ConclusionCompared with traditional open surgery, orthopedic robot-assisted MIS-TLIF in the treatment of single-level DLS can more accurately insert pedicle screws, reduce the loss of DH and the occurrence of FJV, and effectively reduce the incidence of mid-postoperative ASD. Preoperative disc and synovial joint degeneration in adjacent segments, nonrobotic-assisted minimally invasive therapy, and FJV are risk factors for ASD after TLIF.
Objective To explore the effectiveness of reduction robot combined with navigation robot-assisted minimally invasive treatment for Tile type B pelvic fractures. Methods Between January 2022 and February 2023, 10 patients with Tile type B pelvic fractures were admitted. There were 6 males and 4 females with an average age of 45.5 years (range, 30-71 years). The fractures were caused by traffic accident in 5 cases, bruising by heavy object in 3 cases, and falling from height in 2 cases. The interval between injury and operation ranged from 4-13 days (mean, 6.8 days). There were 2 cases of Tile type B1 fractures, 1 case of Tile type B2 fracture, and 7 cases of Tile type B3 fractures. After closed reduction under assistance of reduction robot, the anterior ring was fixed with percutaneous screws with or without internal fixator, and the posterior ring was fixed with sacroiliac joint screws under assistance of navigation robot. The time of fracture reduction assisted by the reduction robot was recorded and the quality of fracture reduction was evaluated according to the Matta scoring criteria. The operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency and time, intraoperative bleeding volume, and incidence of complications were also recorded. During follow-up, the X-ray film of pelvis was taken to review the fracture healing, and the Majeed score was used to evaluate hip joint function. Results The time of fracture reduction was 42-62 minutes (mean, 52.3 minutes). The quality of fracture reduction according to the Matta scoring criteria was rated as excellent in 4 cases, good in 5 cases, and poor in 1 case, with excellent and good rate of 90%. The operation time was 180-235 minutes (mean, 215.5 minutes). Intraoperative fluoroscopy was performed 18-66 times (mean, 31.8 times). Intraoperative fluoroscopy time was 16-59 seconds (mean, 28.6 seconds). The intraoperative bleeding volume was 50-200 mL (range, 110.0 mL). No significant vascular or nerve injury occurred during operation. All patients were followed up 13-18 months (mean, 16 months). X-ray films showed that all fractures healed with the healing time of 11-14 weeks (mean, 12.3 weeks). One case of ectopic ossification occurred during follow-up. At last follow-up, the Majeed score was 70-92 (mean, 72.7), and the hip joint function was rated as excellent in 2 cases and good in 8 cases, with the excellent and good rate of 100%. Conclusion The reduction robot combined with navigation robot-assisted minimally invasive treatment for Tile type B pelvic fractures has the characteristics of intelligence, high safety, convenient operation, and minimally invasive treatment, which can achieve reliable effectiveness.
Robotic gastric cancer surgery had developed rapidly in recent years, and its clinical application had come a long way. More and more studies had demonstrated that the robotic gastric cancer surgery was a safe and feasible procedure, and showed the technical advantages in the lymph node dissection, bleeding control, precise surgery, and postoperative recovery over laparoscopic surgery. However, some limitations such as the high surgical costs, lack of high-quality evidence, insufficient intelligence limited the development of robotic gastric cancer surgery. In the future, with more high-quality evidence-based medicine research and the development of intelligent surgical robots, the robotic gastric cancer surgery will be further standardized and promoted. We believe that robotic gastric cancer surgery will become the mainstream of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer.
Objective To summarize the current research progress of endoscopic/robotic surgery for breast cancer, so as to provide theoretical basis for surgeons and patients to choose surgical methods. Method The relevant literatures on breast cancer endoscopic/robotic surgery at home and abroad in recent years were summarized and reviewed. Results Endoscopic/robotic surgery for breast cancer had the advantages of low intraoperative bleeding, fewer postoperative complications, fast postoperative recovery, good cosmetic results and high patient satisfaction. Conclusions Endoscopic/robotic surgery is a safe and feasible surgical modality and a complement to traditional open breast surgery.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of robotic versus thoracoscopic lobectomy on body trauma and lymphocyte subsets in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsThe clinical data of 120 patients with NSCLC who underwent lobectomy in the same operation group at the same period were collected and divided into a robot group (n=60) and a thoracoscope group (n=60) according to different surgical methods. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage time, drainage volume, postoperative hospital stay, complication rate, pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and other perioperative indicators were recorded in the two groups. Inflammatory markers: C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and lymphocyte subsets (CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, CD4+/CD8+) levels were measured before and 1 d, 3 d after surgery. The effects of the two surgical methods on the body trauma and lymphocyte subsets were compared.ResultsThe operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage time, drainage volume and VAS of the robot group were lower than those of the thoracoscope group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). On the 1st day after surgery, IL-6 of the thoracoscope group was higher than that of the robot group, while CD3+, CD4+ and CD8+ were lower than those of the robot group, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05).ConclusionCompared with thoracoscopic lobectomy, robotic lobectomy has less trauma, less inflammatory response, faster recovery, less inhibitory effect on lymphocyte subsets, and has clinical advantages.
ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted surgery in pancreatic cancer.MethodRecent literatures related to robot-assisted surgery in treatment of pancreatic cancer compared with traditional open surgery or traditional laparoscopic surgery were collected to make an review.ResultsCompared with the traditional laparoscopic surgery, the robot-assisted surgery was expensive, with the obvious advantages in terms of anastomosis and reconstruction. Compared with the open operation, both robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy and robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy had longer operation time, but the length of hospital stay and intraoperative blood loss were obviously shortened, robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy also had higher spleen preservation rate. Compared with the traditional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, the number of lymph node retrieved, R0 resection rate, and splenic preservation rate were also higher in the robot-assisted group. Simultaneously, robot-assisted total pancreatectomy and midsection pancreatectomy were deemed as safe in some high-volume centers.ConclusionsRobot-assisted pancreatic cancer surgery is safe and feasible, but many surgeries are restricted to a small number of high-volume medical centers, and most cases selected to undergo robot-assisted surgery are often early stage patients with small tumor size. A lot of efforts should be made and problems should be solved.
ObjectiveTo explore the application of 5G remote robotic surgery in distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer and evaluate the feasibility and advantages of the “3+2” model “seven-step method”. MethodsThe situations at preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative follow-up of a patient who underwent 5G remote robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer with “3+2” model “seven-step method” in Gansu Provincial People’s Hospital were summarized, and based on our experience of robotic surgery, the application advantages of “3+2” model “seven-step method” in 5G remote robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer was explored. ResultsThe operative time of this case was 190 min, the intraoperative blood loss was 50 mL, the network delay was 43.554 ms, and no intraoperative adverse events occurred. After a one-year follow-up, the patient recovered well, with no complications, good diet and good quality of life. ConclusionsThe “3+2” model “seven-step method” is feasible for 5G remote robotic distal gastrectomy. Further research requires an increased sample size and extended follow-up period.
ObjectiveTo present the initial clinical experience of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer and to analyze the short-term outcomes of these patients.MethodsBetween February 2016 and December 2017, 148 patients with esophageal carcinoma underwent robotic esophagectomy and two-fields lymph node dissection. There were 126 males and 22 females at average age of 62.0±8.0 years. Demographic data, intraoperative characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes were collected and analyzed.Results106 patients underwent McKeown esophagectomy and 42 patients underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. The mean operation time was 336.0±76.0 min, the mean intraoperative blood loss was 130.0±89.0 ml, the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 21.0±8.0 and the mean length of postoperative hospital-stay was 12.0±7.2 days. Postoperative complications included anastomotic fistula (n=8, 5.4%), pulmonary infection (n=13, 8.7%), hoarseness (n=23, 15.5%), tracheoesophageal fistula (n=1, 0.7%), chylothorax (n=4, 2.7%) and incision infection (n=2, 1.4%). There was no intra-operational massive hemorrhage or in-hospital mortality.ConclusionBoth robot-assisted McKeown and Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy are safe and feasible with good early outcomes.
Objective To investigate the clinical effect of the DaVinci robot system and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. Methods Propensity score matching and retrospective cohort study were adopted. Data of 446 patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic radical gastrectomy in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Xijing Hospital, the First Affiliated Hospital of Air Force Military Medical University from January 2014 to April 2021 were collected. Among them, 174 cases underwent robotic and 272 cases underwent laparoscopic surgery. Using the method of propensity score matching, 133 cases were selected from robotic operation group and laparoscopic operation group respectively as the research object. The perioperative indexes of the two groups were compared. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to draw the survival curve and calculate the survival rate. Cox regression model was used to analyze the risk factor of prognosis. Results There was no significant difference in baseline data between the robotic surgery group and the laparoscopic surgery group after propensity score matching (P>0.05). The operative time of the two groups [(236.47±50.32) min vs. (230.64±44.51) min, t=1.000, P=0.318], the number of lymph nodes dissected [(23.32±6.58) vs. (23.95±6.03), t=–0.826, P=0.410], the time of first anal exhaust [(3.46±0.77) days vs. (3.38±0.75) days, t=0.882, P=0.378], and the length of postoperative hospital stay [(6.98±2.84) days vs. (6.94±3.61) days, t=0.094, P=0.925] were similar, the differences were not statistically significant. Compared with the laparoscopic surgery group, the robotic surgery group had less intraoperative bleeding [(83.76±58.23) mL vs. (116.54±58.58) mL, t=–4.577, P<0.001], but the total hospitalization expenses was higher [(10.04±1.92) ten-thousand Yuan vs. (6.80±1.27) ten-thousand Yuan, t=16.211, P<0.001]. The incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups (χ2=0.057, P=0.812) and Clavien-Dindo classification of complications (Z=–0.440, P=0.965) were similar between the two groups, the differences were not statistically significant. The 3-year survival situation was similar between the two groups (P=0.356). Body mass index [RR=0.803, 95%CI (0.698, 0.924), P=0.002], TNM-staging [Ⅱ -stage vs.Ⅰ -stage, RR=4.152, 95%CI (1.121, 15.385), P=0.033; Ⅲ -stage vs.Ⅰ -stage, RR=5.476, 95%CI (1.458, 20.558), P=0.012] and postoperative complications [with vs. without, RR=3.262, 95%CI (1.283, 8.293), P=0.013] were prognostic factors for 3-year survival. Conclusion Compared with laparoscopic radical gastrectomy, robotic radical gastrectomy has the same short-term and long-term prognosis.
In conventional open breast surgery, the surgical trauma is significant and the postoperative scar is often noticeable. Endoscopic and robot-assisted breast surgery is increasingly attracting attention due to the advantages such as smaller incisions, lower complication rate, and improved aesthetic outcomes. However, the lack of natural cavities in the breast has become a primary challenge in establishing and maintaining the necessary surgical space for endoscopic breast surgery. We reviewed the research progress of endoscopic and robot-assisted breast surgery, summarized the the innovations and challenges of existing techniques, and focused on introducing the application value of physical and biological properties of gas and liquid in endoscopic breast surgery.