Abstract
Purposes
To compare the robotic-assisted and the traditional freehand percutaneous scaphoid fixation in number of guidewire attempts, duration of fluoroscopy time, amount of radiation dose, and screw centrality.
Methods
Twenty cadaveric specimens were randomized into either the robotic or freehand group. The scaphoids in both groups were fixed by either the same attending or resident from our hand surgery department. The operation duration, amount of radiation from intraoperative fluoroscopy, total fluoroscopy time, and the number of guidewire attempts were documented and compared. Postoperatively, all the specimens had a computed tomography (CT) scan performed, and the difference in the final position of the screw and the central axis of the scaphoid was examined.
Results
In the robotic group, all the guide wires were satisfactorily positioned within a single attempt, while the median number of attempts in the traditional freehand group was 18 (quaternion 14–65). This also meant that the surgeon in the robotic group experienced significantly lower radiation exposure dose and time as compared to the freehand group. There were no significant differences in the final screw position as compared to the central axis of the scaphoid in both groups. Although there was no difference in surgeon performance in the robotic group, the operative time for the attending was significantly lower as compared to the resident in the freehand group.
Conclusion
Robotic-assisted surgery for scaphoid fracture fixation is superior to the traditional freehand method as it facilitates accurate screw placement with lower radiation exposure and fewer guide wire attempts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its Tables 1 and 2. Raw data that support the findings is available on request from the corresponding author (Liu, B), upon reasonable request. The data is not publicly available due to information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.
References
Clementson M, Bjorkman A, Thomsen NOB (2020) Acute scaphoid fractures: guidelines for diagnosis and treatment. EFORT Open Rev 5:96–103. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.5.190025
Garala K, Taub NA, Dias JJ (2016) The epidemiology of fractures of the scaphoid: impact of age, gender, deprivation and seasonality. Bone Joint J 98-B:654–659. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.98B5.36938
Dias JJ, Singh HP (2011) Displaced fracture of the waist of the scaphoid. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:1433–1439. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.93B11.26934
Majeed H (2014) Non-operative treatment versus percutaneous fixation for minimally displaced scaphoid waist fractures in high demand young manual workers. J Orthop Traumatol 15:239–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-014-0293-z
Weinberg AM, Pichler W, Grechenig S, Tesch NP, Heidari N, Grechenig W (2009) The percutaneous antegrade scaphoid fracture fixation–a safe method? Injury 40:642–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2008.12.016
Starnoni M, Colzani G, De Santis G, Acciaro AL (2019) Median nerve injury caused by screw malpositioning in percutaneous scaphoid fracture fixation. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 7:e2292. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002292
Mesbahi A, Rouhani A (2008) A study on the radiation dose of the orthopaedic surgeon and staff from a mini C-arm fluoroscopy unit. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 132:98–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncn227
Liu B, Wu F, Chen S, Jiang X, Tian W (2019) Robot-assisted percutaneous scaphoid fracture fixation: a report of ten patients. J Hand Surg Eur 44:685–691. https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193419848595
Guo Y, Ma W, Tong D, Liu K, Yin Y, Yang C (2021) Robot-assisted double screw fixation of minimally displaced scaphoid waist fracture nonunions or delayed unions without bone graft. J Hand Surg Eur 46:286–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193420944546
Xiao C, Wei D, Zhu Z, Chen H, Zhou W, Tang X, Yuan J, Wang Y, Hu J (2023) Robot-assisted vs traditional percutaneous freehand for the scaphoid fracture treatment: a retrospective study. Int Orthop 47:839–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05532-9
Guo Y, Ma W, Zlotolow D, Wang C, Tong D, Liu K (2022) A comparison between robotic-assisted scaphoid screw fixation and a freehand technique for acute scaphoid fracture: a randomized, controlled trial. J Hand Surg Am 47:1172–1179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2022.08.021
Tang JB, Giddins G (2016) Why and how to report surgeons’ levels of expertise. J hand surg Eur 41:365–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193416641590
Liverneaux PA, Gherissi A, Stefanelli MB (2008) Kirschner wire placement in scaphoid bones using fluoroscopic navigation: a cadaver study comparing conventional techniques with navigation. Int J Med Robot 4:165–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.194
Meermans G, Van Glabbeek F, Braem MJ, van Riet RP, Hubens G, Verstreken F (2014) Comparison of two percutaneous volar approaches for screw fixation of scaphoid waist fractures: radiographic and biomechanical study of an osteotomy-simulated model. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96:1369–1376. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.01729
Chan KW, McAdams TR (2004) Central screw placement in percutaneous screw scaphoid fixation: a cadaveric comparison of proximal and distal techniques. J Hand Surg Am 29:74–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2003.09.002
Acknowledgements
We thank Fangfang Duan for the work of statistics in the present study.
Funding
This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (82272581), Beijing Natural Science Foundation-Joint funds of Haidian Original innovation Project (L202030), Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Project (Z201100005520094), and Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Talents and Platform Project (202105AF150050).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design, material preparation, data collection, and analysis. All authors contributed to and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
This study was approved by our institutional review board (K2022-111-01).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yin, Y., Wang, Z., Yi, Z. et al. A comparative cadaveric study for percutaneous scaphoid fixation: robotic vs freehand. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 48, 521–527 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-023-06013-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-023-06013-3