Advertisement

Robot-assisted S2 screw fixation for posterior pelvic ring injury

Published:November 16, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2020.11.044

      Highlights

      • TirobotTM is a Chinese independent development of universal orthopaedic surgery robot, can be used in spine, limbs, joints and other orthopaedic surgery. It is a representative work in the development of surgical robots in China. In this study, TirobotTM was used to assist S2 screws placement in treating unstable posterior pelvic fractures.
      • The clinical value of S2 screws in the treatment of pelvic posterior ring unstable fractures was systematically summarized, including S1 dysmorphia and biomechanical advantages, so as to provide a reference for the clinical treatment of such fractures.
      • We confirmed that robot-assisted S2 screw placement improved the safety and accuracy of surgery, reduced the radiation exposure, and improved the efficiency compared with traditional surgical methods.

      Abstract

      Background

      Percutaneous sacroiliac screw is one of the main methods to treat unstable posterior pelvic ring injury. However, complexity of pelvic anatomical structure increases the difficulty and risk with freehand operation. Besides, S2 screw fixation began to receive attention. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the safety, accuracy, efficiency and clinical outcome of robot-assisted S2 screw fixation for posterior pelvic ring injury.

      Methods

      We reviewed 128 cases of unstable posterior pelvic ring injury treated by percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2020. All cases were divided into robot-assisted S1 group (RAS1), robot-assisted S2 group (RAS2), freehand group S1 group (FHS1) and freehand group S2 group (FHS2). The mean times of fluoroscopy per screw and adjustment per guide wire were used to evaluate radiation exposure and the efficiency of screw placement, respectively. The final position of the screw was evaluated with postoperative CT to illustrate security and accuracy. 108 patients (84.38%) were followed up for 5~24 months and the Majeed scores were compared among groups.

      Results

      A total of 180 screws were inserted. In comparison of the mean times of fluoroscopy per screw and adjustment per guide wire, RA group was significant less than FH group, further comparison revealed that freehand S2 placement need more fluoroscopy and adjustment times compared with freehand S1 placement, but for robot-assisted procedure, there was no difference between placing S1 and S2. Screw penetration was found in the FHS1(3/48) and FHS2(2/14) and none in RAS1 or RAS2, which means robot-assisted groups were more safety and accurate (P<0.001). The mean Majeed score in RAS1 (83.33±13.47) and RAS2 (82.32±11.42) was higher than in FHS1 (80.43±12.25) and FHS2 (75.08±18.47), but this difference failed to reach significant.

      Conclusion

      Compared with the freehand operation, TiRobot increased the safety and accuracy, reduced radiation exposure, and improved the efficiency. TiRobot could reduce the risk of S2 placement and provide a safe and feasible way for clinical practice.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Injury
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Templeman D
        • Schmidt A
        • Freese J
        • Weisman I
        Proximity of iliosacral screws to neurovascular structures after internal fixation.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; 194-8 (https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199608000-00023)
        • Hinsche AF
        • Giannoudis PV
        • Smith RM
        Fluoroscopy-based multiplanar image guidance for insertion of sacroiliac screws.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002; 135-44https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200202000-00014
        • Carlson DA
        • Scheid DK
        • Maar DC
        • Baele JR
        • Kaehr DM
        Safe placement of S1 and S2 iliosacral screws: the "vestibule" concept.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2000; 14: 264-269https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-200005000-00007
        • Gras F
        • Marintschev I
        • Wilharm A
        • Klos K
        • Mückley T
        • Hofmann GO
        2D-fluoroscopic navigated percutaneous screw fixation of pelvic ring injuries–a case series.
        BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010; 11: 153https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-11-153
        • Miller AN
        • Routt ML.
        Variations in sacral morphology and implications for iliosacral screw fixation.
        The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2012; 20: 8-16https://doi.org/10.5435/jaaos-20-01-008
        • Conflitti JM
        • Graves ML
        • Chip Routt ML
        Radiographic quantification and analysis of dysmorphic upper sacral osseous anatomy and associated iliosacral screw insertions.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2010; 24 (https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181dc50cd): 630-636
        • Gardner MJ
        • Morshed S
        • Nork SE
        • Ricci WM
        • Chip Routt ML
        Quantification of the upper and second sacral segment safe zones in normal and dysmorphic sacra.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2010; 24: 622-629https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181cf0404
        • Zhang L
        • Peng Y
        • Du C
        • Tang P
        Biomechanical study of four kinds of percutaneous screw fixation in two types of unilateral sacroiliac joint dislocation: a finite element analysis.
        Injury. 2014; 45: 2055-2059https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.052
        • Osterhoff G
        • Ossendorf C
        • Wanner GA
        • Simmen HP
        • Werner CM
        Posterior screw fixation in rotationally unstable pelvic ring injuries.
        Injury. 2011; 42: 992-996https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2011.04.005
        • Yinger K
        • Scalise J
        • Olson SA
        • Bay BK
        • Finkemeier CG
        Biomechanical comparison of posterior pelvic ring fixation.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2003; 17: 481-487https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-200308000-00002
        • van Zwienen CM
        • van den Bosch EW
        • Hoek van Dijke GA
        • Snijders CJ
        • van Vugt AB
        Cyclic loading of sacroiliac screws in Tile C pelvic fractures.
        The Journal of trauma. 2005; 58: 1029-1034https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ta.0000158515.58494.11
        • van Zwienen CM
        • van den Bosch EW
        • Snijders CJ
        • Kleinrensink GJ
        • van Vugt AB
        Biomechanical comparison of sacroiliac screw techniques for unstable pelvic ring fractures.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2004; 18: 589-595https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-200410000-00002
        • Routt ML
        • Simonian PT
        • Agnew SG
        • Mann FA
        Radiographic recognition of the sacral alar slope for optimal placement of iliosacral screws: a cadaveric and clinical study.
        J Orthop Trauma. 1996; 10: 171-177https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-199604000-00005
        • Fu S
        • Zhao Y
        • Lian W
        • Zou D
        • Sun T
        • Zhao Y
        • et al.
        Comparison of the risk of breakage of two kinds of sacroiliac screws in the treatment of bilateral sacral fractures.
        European spine journal: official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. 2014; 23: 1558-1567https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3313-z
        • Zhao Y
        • Zhang S
        • Sun T
        • Wang D
        • Lian W
        • Tan J
        • et al.
        Mechanical comparison between lengthened and short sacroiliac screws in sacral fracture fixation: a finite element analysis.
        Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research: OTSR. 2013; 99: 601-606https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2013.03.023
        • Tabaie SA
        • Bledsoe JG
        • Moed BR
        Biomechanical comparison of standard iliosacral screw fixation to transsacral locked screw fixation in a type C zone II pelvic fracture model.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2013; 27: 521-526https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182781102
        • Gardner MJ
        • Routt ML.
        Transiliac-transsacral screws for posterior pelvic stabilization.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2011; 25: 378-384https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181e47fad
        • He M
        • Han W
        • Zhao CP
        • Su YG
        • Zhou L
        • Wu XB
        • et al.
        Evaluation of a Bi-Planar Robot Navigation System for Insertion of Cannulated Screws in Femoral Neck Fractures.
        Orthop Surg. 2019; 11: 373-379https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12450