[Effectiveness comparison of robot-assisted and traditional freehand technology in treatment of atlantoaxial dislocation].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of robot-assisted and traditional freehand screw placement in the treatment of atlantoaxial dislocation.

Methods: The clinical data of 55 patients with atlantoaxial dislocation who met the selection criteria between January 2021 and January 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different screw placement methods, they were divided into the traditional group (using the traditional freedhand screw placement, 31 cases) and the robot group (using the Mazor X robot-assisted screw placement, 24 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, body mass index, etiology, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, cervical spine Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, operation cost, and intraoperative complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. The VAS score and cervical spine JOA score were used to evaluate the improvement of pain and cervical spinal cord function before operation and at 1 month after operation. CT examination was performed at 3 days after operation, and the accuracy of screw placement was evaluated according to Neo grading criteria.

Results: All the 55 patients successfully completed the operation. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and operation cost in the robot group were significantly higher than those in the traditional group ( P<0.05). A total of 220 C ₁ and C ₂ pedicle screws were inserted in the two groups, and 94 were inserted in the robot group, with an accuracy rate of 95.7%, among them, 2 were inserted by traditional freehand screw placement due to bleeding caused by intraoperative slip. And 126 pedicle screws were inserted in the traditional group, with an accuracy rate of 87.3%, which was significantly lower than that in the robot group ( P<0.05). There were 1 case of venous plexus injury in the robot group and 3 cases in the traditional group, which improved after pressure hemostasis treatment. No other intraoperative complication such as vertebral artery injury or spinal cord injury occurred in both groups. All patients were followed up 4-16 months with an average of 6.6 months, and there was no significant difference in the follow-up time between the two groups ( P>0.05). Postoperative neck pain significantly relieved in both groups, and neurological symptoms relieved to varying degrees. The VAS score and cervicle spine JOA score of both groups significantly improved at 1 month after operation when compared with preoperative scores ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the score change between the two groups ( P>0.05).

Conclusion: In the treatment of atlantoaxial dislocation, the accuracy of robot-assisted screw placement is superior to the traditional freedhand screw placement.