Robot-assisted Pedicle Screw Placement Research Articles

Robotic spine systems: overcoming surgeon experience in pedicle screw accuracy: a prospective study.

Prospective single-center study. To compare the accuracy of pedicle screws placed by freehand and under fluoroscopy and robotic assistance with intraoperative image acquisition. Pedicle screws are the most commonly used spinal anchors owing to their ability to stabilize all three spinal columns. Various techniques such as freehand, fluoroscopy-assisted, and navigation-assisted pedicle screw placements have been used with varying degrees of accuracy. Most studies on robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement have utilized preoperatively acquired computed tomography scans. To our knowledge, this is the only study in the literature that compared freehand with fluoroscopy-guided and robotic-assisted pedicle screw insertion with freehand and fluoroscopy. In this prospective study, a total of 1,120 pedicle screws were placed in the freehand group (n=175), 1,250 in the fluoroscopyassisted group (n=172), and 1,225 in the robotic-assisted group (n=180). Surgical parameters and screw accuracy were analyzed between the three groups. The preoperative plan overlapped with the postoperative O-arm scan to determine if the screws were executed as planned. The frequency of clinically acceptable screw placement (Gertzbein-Robbins grades A and B) in the freehand, fluoroscopy-assisted, and robotic-assisted groups were 97.7%, 98.6%, and 99.34%, respectively. With robotic assistance, an experience-neutralizing effect implied that surgeons with varying levels of experience achieved comparable pedicle screw accuracy, blood loss, O-arm time, robot time, and time per screw. No significant difference in these parameters was found between surgeries commencing before and after 2 PM. No significant differences were noted between the planned and executed screw trajectories in the robotic-assisted group irrespective of surgical experience. The third-generation robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement system used in conjunction with intraoperative threedimensional O-arm imaging consistently demonstrates safe and accurate screw placement with an experience-neutralizing effect.

Analysis of the accuracy between orthopedic robot-assisted and traditional manual pedicle screw placement techniques in adult degenerative scoliosis posterior surgery

Objective: To comparing the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in posterior surgery for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) between robotic-assisted and traditional freehand techniques. Methods: This retrospective study included 92 patients with ADS who underwent posterior spinal surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (Jiangsu Province Hospital) between March 2019 and December 2023. There were 19 males and 73 females with a mean age of (63.6±9.8) years. The patients were divided into two groups based on the technique used for pedicle screw placement: robot-assisted group (34 cases) and manual group (58 cases). Operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, facet joint violation, postoperative complications, magnitude of curve correction, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores preoperatively, 1 week postoperatively, and 1 month postoperatively were compared and analyzed between the two groups. The Gertzbein-Robbins classification criteria was used to assess the accuracy of screw placement. Results: Differences in baseline data, operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, magnitude of curve correction, and VAS and ODI scores preoperatively, 1 week postoperatively, and 1 month postoperatively between the two groups exhibited no statistically significant differences (all P>0.05). The accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the robot-assisted group was significantly higher than that in the manual group [90.9% (416/458) vs 80.1% (697/870), P<0.001]. In terms of surgical segments, in T1-T12 and L1-S1 segments, the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the robot group were both significantly higher than those in the control group [91.5% (130/142) vs 77.8% (186/239), P=0.001; 90.3% (271/300) vs 80.8% (502/621), P<0.001]. However, no significant differences was observed in the accuracy of S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw placement between the two groups [90.0%(9/10) vs 93.8%(15/16), P=0.727]. Moreover, no significant differences was found in the deviation direction of the cortical screw penetration between both groups (P=0.133). Significant differences were observed in the accuracy of screw placement between the Nash Moe 2 and 3 vertebral bodies in the robot group compared with those in the control group [88.9% (88/99) vs 71.0% (115/162), P=0.001; 89.2% (83/93) vs 60.2% (68/113), P<0.001]. Additionally, the incidence and grade of facet joint violation in the manual group were both significantly higher than those in the robot-assisted group (both P<0.001). No statistically significant differences was identified in postoperative complications between the two groups (P=0.841). Conclusion: It suggests that robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in posterior surgery for patients with ADS can significantly improve the accuracy of screw placement and reduce the incidence of facet joint violation.

Robotic-Assisted Navigation in Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Reduces Surgeons’ Mental Workload Compared With Fluoroscopic and Computed Tomographic Techniques: A Nonrandomized Prospective Controlled Trial

Background: Pedicle screw placement during spine fusion is physically and mentally demanding for surgeons. Consequently, spine surgeons can become fatigued, which has implications for both patient safety and surgeon well-being. Purpose: We sought to assess the cognitive workload of surgeons placing pedicle screws using robotic-assisted navigation compared with fluoroscopic and computed tomography (CT)-assisted placement. Methods: We performed a nonrandomized prospective controlled trial to compare the cognitive workload of 3 surgeons performing single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) using robotic, CT, or fluoroscopic navigation on 25 patients (15 in the robotic navigation group and 10 in the nonrobotic group). Immediately after each procedure, surgeons submitted the National Aeronautics and Space Administration–Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), which has 6 subscales: mental demands, physical demands, temporal demands, performance, effort, and frustration. Four tasks associated with pedicle screw placement were assessed independently: (1) screw planning, (2) calibrating robot/obtaining imaging/registration, (3) pedicle cannulation, and (4) screw placement. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were obtained and reviewed. Results: Surgeons’ self-reported cognitive workload was significantly reduced when using robotic-assisted navigation versus CT/fluoroscopic navigation. Workload was reduced for screw planning, pedicle cannulation, and screw placement. In addition, there were significant reductions in each subdomain for these 3 tasks, encompassing mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, effort, and frustration with improved task performance. Conclusions: This study found significant reductions in mental workload with improved perceived performance for robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement compared with fluoroscopic and CT-navigation techniques. Lowering the cognitive burden associated with screw placement may allow surgeons to address the remainder of the operative case with less decision fatigue, prevent complications, and increase surgeon wellness.

Preliminary comparative study of spinal robot-assisted pedicle screw placement using different surgical approaches

To compare the effectiveness of spinal robot-assisted pedicle screw placement through different surgical approaches and to guide the clinical selection of appropriate robot-assisted surgical approaches. The clinical data of 14 patients with thoracolumbar vertebral diseases who met the selection criteria between January 2023 and August 2023 were retrospectively analyzed, and all of them underwent pedicle screw placement under assistant of the Mazor X spinal surgery robot through different surgical approaches. The patients were divided into posterior median approach (PMA) group ( n=6) and intermuscular approach (IMA) group ( n=8) according to the surgical approaches, and there was no significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, disease type, and fixed segment between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, screw-related complications, and reoperation rate were recorded and compared between the two groups; the inclination angle of the screw, the distance between the screw and the midline, and the caudal inclination angle of the screw were measured based on X-ray films at immediate after operation. There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups ( P>0.05). There was no screw-related complication such as nerve injury in both groups, and no patients underwent secondary surgery. At immediate after operation, the inclination angle of the screw, the distance between the screw and the midline, and the caudal inclination angle of the screw in the IMA group were significantly greater than those in the PMA group ( P<0.05). There are differences in the position and inclination angle of screws placed with robot-assisted surgery through different surgical approaches, which may be due to the obstruction of the screw path by soft tissues such as skin and muscles. When using spinal robot-assisted surgery, selecting the appropriate surgical approach for different diseases can make the treatment more reasonable and effective.

Robotic Spine Surgery: Systematic Review of Common Error Types and Best Practices.

Robotic systems have emerged as a significant advancement in the field of spine surgery. They offer improved accuracy in pedicle screw placement and reduce intraoperative complications, hospital length of stay, blood loss, and radiation exposure. As the use of robotics in spine surgery continues to grow, it becomes imperative to understand common errors and challenges associated with this new and promising technology. Although the reported accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is very high, the current literature does not capture near misses or incidental procedural errors that might have been managed during surgery or did not alter treatment of patients. We evaluated errors that occur during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion and identify best practices to minimize their occurrence. In this systematic review, we characterized 3 types of errors encountered during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion-registration errors, skiving, and interference errors-that have been reported in the literature. Our search yielded 13 relevant studies reporting robot-assisted screw errors. Nine studies reported registration errors, with 60% of failed screws in those studies caused by registration issues. Seven studies highlighted skiving errors; 26.8% of the failed screws in those studies were caused by skiving. Finally, interference errors were reported in 4 studies, making up 19.5% of failed screws. On the basis of these findings, we suggest best practices-including close attention to preoperative planning, patient positioning, image registration, and equipment selection-to minimize the occurrence of these errors. Awareness of how errors occur may increase the safety of this technology.

Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted percutaneous fixation for thoracolumbar fractures in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

BackgroundSpinal fractures in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) mainly present as instability, involving all three columns of the spine, and surgical intervention is often considered necessary. However, in AS patients, the significant alterations in bony structure and anatomy result in a lack of identifiable landmarks, which increases the difficulty of pedicle screw implantation. Therefore, we present the clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted percutaneous fixation for thoracolumbar fractures in patients with AS.MethodsA retrospective review was conducted on a series of 12 patients diagnosed with AS. All patients sustained thoracolumbar fractures between October 2018 and October 2022 and underwent posterior robotic-assisted percutaneous fixation procedures. Outcomes of interest included operative time, intra-operative blood loss, complications, duration of hospital stay and fracture union. The clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). To investigate the achieved operative correction, pre- and postoperative radiographs in the lateral plane were analyzed by measuring the Cobb angle.ResultsThe 12 patients had a mean age of 62.8 ± 13.0 years and a mean follow-up duration of 32.7 ± 18.9 months. Mean hospital stay duration was 15 ± 8.0 days. The mean operative time was 119.6 ± 32.2 min, and the median blood loss was 50 (50, 250) ml. The VAS value improved from 6.8 ± 0.9 preoperatively to 1.3 ± 1.0 at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). The ODI value improved from 83.6 ± 6.1% preoperatively to 11.8 ± 6.6% at the latest follow-up (P < 0.05). The average Cobb angle changed from 15.2 ± 11.0 pre-operatively to 8.3 ± 7.1 at final follow-up (P < 0.05). Bone healing was consistently achieved, with an average healing time of 6 (5.3, 7.0) months. Of the 108 screws implanted, 2 (1.9%) were improperly positioned. One patient experienced delayed nerve injury after the operation, but the nerve function returned to normal upon discharge.ConclusionPosterior robotic-assisted percutaneous internal fixation can be used as an ideal surgical treatment for thoracolumbar fractures in AS patients. However, while robot-assisted pedicle screw placement can enhance the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion, it should not be relied upon solely.

Flattening the learning curve – Early experience of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery

Aims and objectivesTo determine accuracy of pedicle screws placed by freehand, fluoroscopy-assistance and robotic-assistance with intraoperative image acquisition, and determine the presence of learning curve in robotic spine surgery in a prospective single centre study. Materials and methodsIn a prospective study, a total of 1120 pedicle screws were placed in Freehand group (n = 175), 1250 screws were placed in fluoroscopy-assisted group (n = 172), and 1225 screws were inserted in Robotic-assisted group(n = 180). Surgical parameters and screw accuracy were analyzed between the three groups. The preoperative plan was overlapped with post operative O-arm scan to determine if the screws were executed as planned. ResultsThe frequency of clinically acceptable screw placement (Gertzbein and Robbins grade A, B) in the Freehand, Fluoroscopy-assisted, and Robotic-assisted groups were 97.7 %, 98.6 %, and 99.34 % respectively. Higher pedicle screw accuracy, and lower blood loss were seen with robotic assistance. There was no significant difference in these parameters between surgeries commencing before and after 2 p.m. We found no statistically significant differences between the planned and executed screw trajectories in robotic assisted group irrespective of surgical experience. ConclusionThe third-generation robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement system, used in conjunction with intraoperative 3D O-arm imaging, consistently lowered blood loss and increased accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine. It also has easy adaptability into spine practice with minimal learning curve.

Development of a software system for surgical robots based on multimodal image fusion: study protocol.

Surgical robots are gaining increasing popularity because of their capability to improve the precision of pedicle screw placement. However, current surgical robots rely on unimodal computed tomography (CT) images as baseline images, limiting their visualization to vertebral bone structures and excluding soft tissue structures such as intervertebral discs and nerves. This inherent limitation significantly restricts the applicability of surgical robots. To address this issue and further enhance the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement, this study will develop a software system for surgical robots based on multimodal image fusion. Such a system can extend the application range of surgical robots, such as surgical channel establishment, nerve decompression, and other related operations. Initially, imaging data of the patients included in the study are collected. Professional workstations are employed to establish, train, validate, and optimize algorithms for vertebral bone segmentation in CT and magnetic resonance (MR) images, intervertebral disc segmentation in MR images, nerve segmentation in MR images, and registration fusion of CT and MR images. Subsequently, a spine application model containing independent modules for vertebrae, intervertebral discs, and nerves is constructed, and a software system for surgical robots based on multimodal image fusion is designed. Finally, the software system is clinically validated. We will develop a software system based on multimodal image fusion for surgical robots, which can be applied to surgical access establishment, nerve decompression, and other operations not only for robot-assisted nail placement. The development of this software system is important. First, it can improve the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, percutaneous vertebroplasty, percutaneous kyphoplasty, and other surgeries. Second, it can reduce the number of fluoroscopies, shorten the operation time, and reduce surgical complications. In addition, it would be helpful to expand the application range of surgical robots by providing key imaging data for surgical robots to realize surgical channel establishment, nerve decompression, and other operations.

Analysis of guide wire displacement in robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw implantation

Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is prone to guide wire migration, and the related influencing factors have not yet been discussed. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate and analyze the causes of robot-assisted spinal pedicle guide wire displacement and summarize the relevant treatment strategies. The surgical outcomes of 82 patients who underwent robotic-assisted pedicle screw spinal placement at our hospital between July 2022 and June 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 342 screws were placed in 82 patients; 47 guide wires were offset, 47 guide wires were replaced, and 295 guide wires were not significantly offset, with a first guide wire offset rate of 13.7% and a total guide wire offset rate of 12.1%. Univariate analysis showed that Screw placement level, whether respiration was controlled during guide wire placement, Hu value of CT, the position of needle insertion point, and operation time had a significant effect on guide wire deviation (P < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the inclusion of screw placement segments, whether breathing was controlled during guide wire placement, and Hu value of CT had a significant effect on guide wire offset (P < 0.05). Whether the guide wire was offset had no significant effect on the accuracy of subsequent pedicle screw implantation (P > 0.05). The level of screw placement, whether breathing was controlled during guide wire placement, and Hu value of CT were independent risk factors for guide wire deviation. When causing an excursion, screw orientation can be adjusted during intraoperative screw placement, and guide wire excursion has no significant impact on the accuracy of subsequent pedicle screw placement.

Preoperative Robotics Planning Facilitates Complex Construct Design in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery-A Preliminary Experience.

(1) Background: The correction of adult spinal deformity (ASD) can require long, complex constructs with multiple rods which traverse important biomechanical levels to achieve multi-pelvic fixation. Minimally invasive (MIS) placement of these constructs has historically been difficult. Advanced technologies such as spinal robotics platforms can facilitate the design and placement of these constructs and further enable these surgical approaches in MIS deformity surgery. (2) Methods: A retrospective study was performed on a series of ASD patients undergoing MIS deformity correction with ≥eight fusion levels to the lower thoracic spine with preoperative robotic construct planning and robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. (3) Results: There were 12 patients (10 female, mean age 68.6 years) with a diagnosis of either degenerative scoliosis (8 patients) or sagittal imbalance (4 patients). All underwent preoperative robotic planning to assist in MIS robot-assisted percutaneous or transfascial placement of pedicle and iliac screws with multiple-rod constructs. Mean operative values per patient were 9.9 levels instrumented (range 8-11), 3.9 interbody cages (range 2-6), 3.3 iliac fixation points (range 2-4), 3.3 rods (range 2-4), 18.7 screws (range 13-24), estimated blood loss 254 cc (range 150-350 cc), and operative time 347 min (range 242-442 min). All patients showed improvement in radiographic sagittal, and, if applicable, coronal parameters. Mean length of stay was 5.8 days with no ICU admissions. Ten patients ambulated on POD 1 or 2. Of 224 screws placed minimally invasively, four breaches were identified on intraoperative CT and repositioned (three lateral, one medial) for a robot-assisted screw accuracy of 98.2%. (4) Conclusions: Minimally invasive long-segment fixation for adult spinal deformity surgery has historically been considered laborious and technically intensive. Preoperative robotics planning facilitates the design and placement of even complex multi-rod multi-pelvic fixation for MIS deformity surgery.

In Reply: Learning Curves for Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: Analysis of Operative Time for 234 Cases.

In Reply: Learning Curves for Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: Analysis of Operative Time for 234 Cases.

Letter: Learning Curves for Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: Analysis of Operative Time for 234 Cases.

Letter: Learning Curves for Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: Analysis of Operative Time for 234 Cases.

Spine

The February 2024 Spine Roundup360 looks at: Surgeon assessment of bone – any good?; Robotics reduces radiation exposure in some spinal surgery; Interbody fusion cage versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior instrumentation; Is robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement an answer to the learning curve?; Acute non-traumatic spinal subarachnoid haematomas: a report of five cases and a systematic review of the literature; Is L4-L5 lateral interbody fusion safe and effective?

Mazor X Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: A Case Series

Pedicle screw placement is a well-established procedure in spine surgeries, and the utilization of robots in spinal surgery has been on the rise. This study aims to investigate the accuracy and screw placement time associated with the use of Mazor X robots in robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement. A retrospective case study was conducted on 12 patients with lumbar spine disease who underwent Mazor X robot-assisted surgery. Screw placement accuracy was assessed using the Gertzbein-Robinson classification. Additionally, total screw placement time and fluoroscopy time were documented for analysis. A total of 60 screws were placed in the 12 patients who received robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement. Of these screws, 98.3% were found to be within the safe zone. As the cases progressed, there was a noticeable decrease in total screw placement time and fluoroscopy time. Our findings suggest that Mazor X robotic-assisted spine surgery boasts high accuracy rates and demonstrates a decreasing trend in screw placement time and fluoroscopy time. To the best of our knowledge, our institution is the first in China to employ the Mazor X robot for pedicle screw placement surgeries and to document its associated characteristics.

Improving pedicle screw path planning by vertebral posture estimation

Objective. Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery can reduce the complications associated with the screw placement and reduce the hospital return counts due to malfunctions. However, it requires accurate planning for a high-quality procedure. The state-of-the-art technologies reported in the literature either ignore the anatomical variations across vertebrae or require substantial human interactions. We present an improved approach that achieves pedicle screw path planning through multiple projections of a numerically re-oriented vertebra with the estimated posture. Approach. We proposed an improved YOLO-type neural network model (YOLOPOSE3D) to estimate the posture of a vertebra before pedicle path planning. In YOLOPOSE3D, the vertebral posture is given as a rotation quaternion and 3D location coordinates by optimizing the intersection over union of the vertebra with the predicted posture and the actual posture. Then, a new local coordinate system is established for the vertebra based on the estimated posture. Finally, the optimal pedicle screw path trajectory is determined from the multiple projections of the vertebra in the local coordinates. Main results. The experimental results in difficult cases of scoliosis showed that the new YOLOPOSE3D network could accurately detect the location and posture of the vertebra with average translation and orientation errors as small as 1.55 mm and 2.55°. The screw path planning achieved 83.1% success rate without breaking the pedicle cortex for the lumbar vertebral L1–L5, which is better than that of a doctor’s manual planning, 82.4%. With the clinical class A requirement to allow less than 2 mm out of the pedicle cortex, the success rate achieved nearly 100%. Significance. The proposed YOLOPOSED3D method can accurately determine the vertebral postures. With the improved posture prior, better clinical outcomes can be achieved for pedicle screw placement in spine internal fixation procedures.

Learning Curves for Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: Analysis of Operative Time for 234 Cases.

Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is associated with greater accuracy, reduced radiation, less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and fewer complications than freehand screw placement. However, it can be associated with longer operative times and an extended training period. We report the initial experience of a surgeon using a robot system at an academic medical center. We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing robot-assisted pedicle screw placement at a single tertiary care institution by 1 surgeon from 10/2017 to 05/2022. Linear regression, analysis of variance, and cumulative sum analysis were used to evaluate operative time learning curves. Operative time subanalyses for surgery indication, number of levels, and experience level were performed. In total, 234 cases were analyzed. A significant 0.19-minute decrease in operative time per case was observed (r = 0.14, P = .03). After 234 operations, this translates to a reduction in 44.5 minutes from the first to last case. A linear relationship was observed between case number and operative time in patients with spondylolisthesis (-0.63 minutes/case, r = 0.41, P < .001), 2-level involvement (-0.35 minutes/case, r = 0.19, P = .05), and 4-or-more-level involvement (-1.29 minutes/case, r = 0.24, P = .05). This resulted in reductions in operative time ranging from 39 minutes to 1.5 hours. Continued reductions in operative time were observed across the learning, experienced, and expert phases, which had mean operative times of 214, 197, and 146 minutes, respectively ( P < .001). General proficiency in robot-assisted surgery was observed after the 20th case. However, 67 cases were required to reach mastery, defined as the inflection point of the cumulative sum curve. This study documents the long-term learning curve of a fellowship-trained spine neurosurgeon. Operative time significantly decreased with more experience. Although gaining comfort with robotic systems may be challenging or require additional training, it can benefit surgeons and patients alike with continued reductions in operative time.

Robotic versus nonrobotic sacroiliac joint fusion.

Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in spinal fusion has been well studied. However, few studies have evaluated robot-assisted sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion. The aim of this study was to compare surgical characteristics, accuracy, and complications between robot-assisted and fluoroscopically guided SIJ fusion. A retrospective review of 110 patients with 121 SIJ fusions done at a single academic institution was conducted from 2014 to 2023. Inclusion criteria included adult age and a robot- or fluoroscopically guided approach to SIJ fusion. Patients were excluded if the SIJ fusion was part of a longer fusion construct, not minimally invasive, and/or had missing data. Demographics, approach type (robotic vs fluoroscopic), operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), number of screws, intraoperative complications, 30-day complications, number of intraoperative fluoroscopic images (as a surrogate for radiation exposure), implant placement accuracy, and pain status at the first follow-up were recorded. Primary endpoints were SIJ screw placement accuracy and complications. Secondary endpoints were operative time, radiation exposure, and pain status at the first follow-up. Ninety patients were included who underwent a total of 101 SIJ fusions, of which 78 were robotic and 23 were fluoroscopic. The mean age of the cohort at the time of surgery was 55.9 ± 13.8 years; 46 patients were females (51.1%). No difference was found in screw placement accuracy between robotic and fluoroscopic fusion (1.3% vs 8.7%, p = 0.06). Chi-square analysis of robotic versus fluoroscopic fusion found no difference in the presence of 30-day complications (p = 0.62). Mann-Whitney U-test analysis found that robotic fusion had a significantly longer operative time than fluoroscopic fusion (72.0 vs 61.0 minutes, p = 0.01); however, robot-assisted fusions involved significantly lower radiation exposure (26.7 vs 187.4 fluoroscopic images, p < 0.001). No difference in EBL was noted (p = 0.17). No intraoperative complications were present in this cohort. Subgroup analysis comparing the 23 most recent robotic cases against the 23 fluoroscopic cases found that robotic fusion still was associated with significantly longer operative times than fluoroscopic fusion (74.0 ± 26.4 vs 61.0 ± 14.9 minutes, respectively; p = 0.047). SIJ screw placement accuracy did not significantly differ between robot-assisted and fluoroscopic SIJ fusion. Complications overall were low and similar between the two groups. The operative time was longer with robotic assistance, but there was markedly less radiation exposure to the surgeon and staff.

Single position robot-assisted pedicle screw placement with S2-alar-iliac fixation in lateral decubitus: cadaveric feasibility study and early clinical experience.

Single position lateral fusion with robotic assistance eliminates the need for surgical staging while harnessing the precision of robotic adjuncts. We expand on this technique by demonstrating the technical feasibility of placing bilateral pedicle screws with S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) fixation while in the lateral position. A cadaveric study was performed using 12 human specimens. A retrospective clinical series was also performed for patients who had undergone robot-assisted placement of S2AI screws in lateral decubitus between June 2020 and June 2022. Case demographics, implant placement time, implant size, screw accuracy, and complications were recorded. Early postoperative radiographic outcomes were reported. In the cadaveric series, a total of 126 screws were placed with robotic assistance in 12 cadavers of which 24 screws were S2AI. There were four breaches from pedicle screws and none with S2AI screws for an overall accuracy rate of 96.8%. In the clinical series, four patients (all male, mean age 65.8years) underwent single position lateral surgery with S2AI distal fixation. Mean BMI was 33.6 and mean follow-up was 20.5months. Mean radiographic improvements were lumbar lordosis 12.3 ± 4.7°, sagittal vertical axis 1.5 ± 2.1cm, pelvic tilt 8.5 ± 10.0°, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch 12.3 ± 4.7°. A total of 42 screws were placed of which eight screws were S2AI. There were two breaches from pedicle screws and none from S2AI screws for an overall accuracy rate of 95.2%. No repositioning or salvage techniques were required for the S2AI screws. We demonstrate here the technical feasibility of single position robot-assisted placement of S2-alar-iliac screws in the lateral decubitus position for single position surgery.

Clinical application of spinal robot in cervical spine surgery: safety and accuracy of posterior pedicle screw placement in comparison with conventional freehand methods

The novel robot-assisted (RA) technique has been utilized increasingly to improve the accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement. Although the clinical application of the RA technique has been investigated in several case series and comparative studies, the superiority and safety of RA over conventional freehand (FH) methods remain controversial. Meanwhile, the intra-pedicular accuracy of the two methods has not been compared for patients with cervical traumatic conditions. This study aimed to compare the rate and risk factors of intra-pedicular accuracy of RA versus the conventional FH approach for posterior pedicle screw placement in cervical traumatic diseases. A total of 52 patients with cervical traumatic diseases who received cervical screw placement using RA (26 patients) and FH (26 patients) techniques were retrospectively included. The primary outcome was the intra-pedicular accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement according to the Gertzbin-Robbins scale. Secondary outcome parameters included surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospital stay, and complications. Moreover, the risk factors that possibly affected intra-pedicular accuracy were assessed using univariate analyses. Out of 52 screws inserted using the RA method, 43 screws (82.7%) were classified as grade A, with the remaining 7 (13.5%) and 2 (3.8%) screws classified as grades B and C. In the FH cohort, 60.8% of the 79 screws were graded A, with the remaining screws graded B (21, 26.6%), C (8, 10.1%), and D (2, 2.5%). The RA technique showed a significantly higher rate of optimal intra-pedicular accuracy than the FH method (P = 0.008), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of clinically acceptable accuracy (P = 0.161). Besides, the RA technique showed remarkably longer surgery time, less postoperative drainage, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and equivalent intraoperative blood loss and complications than the FH technique. Furthermore, the univariate analyses showed that severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane (P = 0.003) and shorter width of the lateral mass at the inferior margin of the posterior arch (P = 0.014) were risk factors related to the inaccuracy of C1 screw placement. The diagnosis of HRVA (P < 0.001), severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane (P < 0.001), short pedicle width (P < 0.001), and short pedicle height (P < 0.001) were risk factors related to the inaccuracy of C2 screw placement. RA cervical pedicle screw placement was associated with a higher rate of optimal intra-pedicular accuracy to the FH technique for patients with cervical traumatic conditions. The severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane independently contributed to high rates of the inaccuracy of C1 and C2 screw placements. RA pedicle screw placement is safe and useful for cervical traumatic surgery.

Robot-Assisted Thoracolumbar Fixation After Acute Spinal Trauma: A Case Series.

Pedicle screw fixation has become the workhorse for the stabilization of the thoracolumbar spine. Since accurate pedicle screw placement is necessary for a successful surgery, three-dimensional navigation has become a mainstay for placing pedicle screws. However, the published studies have an overrepresentation of lumbar screws despite the prevalence of thoracic fractures. Furthermore, no robotic-assisted pedicle screw study has focused solely on traumatic fractures. The goal of this study was to address whether (1) robot-assisted pedicle screw placement had comparable accuracy in the thoracic and thoracolumbar region and (2) robot-assisted spine surgery was feasible in an acute, traumatic setting. We performed 14 consecutive, thoracolumbar spinal stabilization procedures in which 126 pedicle screws were placed using the Globus ExcelsiusGPS® spine robot in an acute, traumatic setting. Operative times were measured, and the accuracy of pedicle screws was assessed with the Gertzbein and Robbins classification system by two board-certified neuroradiologists. A total of 60-thoracic (T3-T11), the 24-thoracolumbar junction (T12-L1), 40-lumbar (L2-L5), and two-sacral pedicle screws were placed. Pedicle screw placement was accurate with a < 1% (1/126) pedicle breach rate. Thoracolumbar robotic spine surgery in an acute, traumatic setting was demonstrated to have a good safety profile with only one minor neurological deficit which was related to positioning. Furthermore, surgical times were inversely related to the case number. These results together suggest that robot-assisted spine surgery is accurate in the thoracic spine. Furthermore, placement of thoracolumbar screws in an acute trauma is non-inferior to other methods when based on accuracy.