Abstract:

Objective  This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted and navigation-assisted techniques in the treatment of osteoid osteoma. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze differences in surgical time, blood loss, success rate, postoperative complications, and patient recovery between the two techniques. Methods  A total of 64 patients with osteoid osteoma who underwent either robot-assisted (n=25) or navigation-assisted (n=39) surgery at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital from August 2022 to December 2023 were included. Data on patient age, gender, lesion location, preoperative lesion size, blood loss, surgical time, follow-up duration, preoperative and discharge Visual Analogue Score (VAS), and success rates were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparative analysis.  Results  There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, gender, lesion location, preoperative lesion size, preoperative VAS score, and follow-up duration. The robot-assisted group had a significantly shorter surgical time than the navigation-assisted group ［(102.64±21.65） min vs （120.46±30.98）　min, P=0.025］. The amount of blood loss in the robot-assisted and navigation-assisted groups was ［50 (20,50) ml] vs ［50(20,100)ml］, respectively, though this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.287). There were no significant differences in VAS score changes before discharge between the two groups (P > 0.05).  Conclusions   Robot-assisted surgery demonstrates significant advantages in the treatment of osteoid osteoma, particularly in terms of reduced surgical time and increased precision. Future studies should further explore the long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness of these two techniques to provide more comprehensive guidance for clinical practice.

Key words: osteoid osteoma, robot-assisted surgery, computer navigation technology, minimally invasive