[A comparative study on internal fixation of calcaneal fractures assisted by robot and traditional open reduction internal fixation].

To compare the effectiveness of robot assisted internal fixation and traditional open reduction and internal fixation for calcaneal fractures.The clinical data of 44 patients (44 feets) with calcaneal fracture admitted between October 2017 and December 2018 who met the selection criteria were retrospectively analyzed. According to different operation methods, they were divided into trial group (19 cases, treated with robot assisted percutaneous reduction and cannulated screw fixation through tarsal sinus incision) and control group (25 cases, treated with open reduction and internal fixation via traditional tarsal sinus incision). There was no significant difference in gender, age, injured side, cause of injury, fracture type, time from injury to operation, and preoperative Böhler angle, Gissane angle, calcaneus width, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Association (AOFAS) score, and other general data between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, and fracture healing time were recorded and compared between the two groups. Before operation and at 6 months after operation, the Böhler angle and Gissane angle were measured on the lateral X-ray film, and the calcaneal width was measured on the axial X-ray film of the calcaneus to evaluate the recovery of the deformity and collapse after surgical treatment; the AOFAS score was used to evaluate the function of the affected foot and ankle joint.The operation time of the trial group was significantly longer than that of the control group ( P<0.05), but the intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency was significantly less than that of the control group ( P<0.05). In the control group, 1 case had skin necrosis, and 1 case had a little leakage from the incision; the rest of the two groups had no skin- and incision-related complications. Patients in both groups were followed up 6-12 months, with an average of 9.5 months. At 6 months after operation, the Böhler angle, Gissane angle, and calcaneal width in the two groups were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05); the fractures in the two groups were healed, there was no significant difference in healing time ( t=-1.890, P=0.066); the AOFAS scores of the two groups were significantly higher than those before operation ( P<0.05), and the AOFAS score of the trial group was significantly higher than that of the control group ( t=-3.135, P=0.003).Compared with traditional C-arm fluoroscopic internal fixation for calcaneal fractures, robot-assisted internal fixation via tarsal sinus incision for calcaneal fractures significantly improves the function of the affected foot and maintains the accuracy of nail implantation after fracture reduction, reducing intraoperative fluoroscopy times, and the fracture heals well.比较机器人辅助下跟骨骨折内固定与传统切开复位内固定疗效差异。.回顾分析 2017 年 10 月—2018 年 12 月收治且符合选择标准的 44 例 44 足跟骨骨折患者临床资料，根据术式不同分为研究组（19 例，行机器人辅助下跗骨窦切口经皮复位空心螺钉内固定术治疗）和对照组（25 例，行传统 C 臂 X 线机透视下跗骨窦切口切开复位内固定术治疗）。两组患者性别、年龄、受伤侧别、致伤原因、骨折分型、受伤至手术时间以及术前 Böhler 角、Gissane 角、跟骨宽度、美国矫形足踝协会（AOFAS）评分等一般资料比较差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。记录并比较两组患者手术时间、术中 C 臂 X 线机透视次数、骨折愈合时间；术前及术后 6 个月于侧位 X 线片上测量 Böhler 角、Gissane 角和跟骨轴位 X 线片上测量跟骨宽度，评价手术治疗对畸形及塌陷的恢复情况；术前及术后 6 个月采用 AOFAS 评分评价患足踝关节功能。.研究组患者手术时间显著长于对照组，但术中 C 臂 X 线机透视次数显著少于对照组，差异均有统计学意义（ P<0.05）。术后对照组 1 例出现皮缘坏死，1 例出现切口少许渗液；两组其余患者无皮肤及切口相关并发症发生。两组患者均获随访，随访时间 6～12 个月，平均 9.5 个月。术后 6 个月，两组 Böhler 角、Gissane 角和跟骨宽度均较术前显著改善（ P<0.05），两组间比较差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）；两组骨折均愈合，愈合时间比较差异无统计学意义（ t=−1.890， P=0.066）；两组 AOFAS 评分均较术前显著提高（ P<0.05），研究组 AOFAS 评分显著高于对照组（ t=−3.135， P=0.003）。.与传统 C 臂 X 线机透视下内固定治疗跟骨骨折相比，机器人辅助跗骨窦切口内固定治疗跟骨骨折能有效维持骨折复位后植钉精度，减少术中透视次数，骨折愈合良好，促进患足功能恢复。.