【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the clinical manifestation of thoracolumbar vertebral osteoid osteoma and to evaluate the surgical procedure and effectiveness of transpedicular tumor resection and spine reconstruction with posterior pedicle screw system and bone graft. Methods Between January 2001 and June 2010, 8 cases of thoracolumbar vertebral osteoid osteoma underwent one-stage transpedicular intralesional excision and bone graft combined with spine reconstruction with pedicle screw system through posterior approach. There were 5 males and 3 females with a median age of 15.5 years (range, 6-27 years). Affected segments included T8 in 1 case, T10 in 1 case, L2 in 2 cases, L3 in 1 case, L4 in 1 case, and L5 in 2 cases. All of the cases had back pain, 1 had radiating pain of lower extremity, and 4 patients presented with scoliosis. The mean diameter of lesions was 1.6 cm (range, 0.9-2.0 cm). Results The mean operation time was 110 minutes (range, 70-170 minutes) and the mean blood loss was 720 mL (range, 300-1 400 mL). The postoperative pathologic examination showed osteoid osteoma in all cases. All patients achieved healing of the incisions by first intention. Immediate relief of pain was observed after operation in all patients without complication. The patients were followed up 12-58 months (mean, 39 months). No local recurrence or spinal deformity was observed during the follow-up. Conclusion CT can show a low attenuation nidus with central mineralization and varying degrees of perinidal sclerosis, so it has great value for final diagnosis of thoracolumbar vertebral osteoid osteoma. One-stage transpedicular intralesional excision supplemented by impaction bone graft and combined posterior pedicle screw stabilization is a safe and effective treatment.
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.
Objective To compare the accuracy and effectiveness of orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for limb osteoid osteoma. Methods A clinical data of 36 patients with limb osteoid osteomas admitted between June 2016 and June 2023 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 16 patients underwent orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (robot-assisted surgery group), and 20 patients underwent tumor resection after lotcated by C-arm X-ray fluoroscopy (open surgery group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the gender, age, lesion site, tumor nidus diameter, and preoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores (P>0.05). The operation time, lesion resection time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, lesion resection accuracy, and postoperative analgesic use frequency were recorded and compared between the two groups. The VAS scores for pain severity were compared preoperatively and at 3 days and 3 months postoperatively.Results Compared with the open surgery group, the robot-assisted surgery group had a longer operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, less fluoroscopy frequency, less postoperative analgesic use frequency, and higher lesion resection accuracy (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in lesion resection time (P>0.05). All patients were followed up after surgery, with a follow-up period of 3-24 months (median, 12 months) in the two groups. No postoperative complication such as wound infection or fracture occurred in either group during follow-up. No tumor recurrence was observed during follow-up. The VAS scores significantly improved in both groups at 3 days and 3 months after surgery when compared with preoperative value (P<0.05). The VAS score at 3 days after surgery was significantly lower in robot-assisted surgery group than that in open surgery group (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in VAS scores at 3 months between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with open surgery, robot-assisted resection of limb osteoid osteomas has longer operation time, but the accuracy of lesion resection improve, intraoperative blood loss reduce, and early postoperative pain is lighter. It has the advantages of precision and minimally invasive surgery.