Navigated robotic assistance improves pedicle screw accuracy in minimally invasive surgery of the lumbosacral spine: 600 pedicle screws in a single institution

Navigation and Robotic Single-Position Prone LLIF: First Cases in Brazil

OBJECTIVE

has been rapid technological advancement in navigation-guided minimally invasive surgery over the past two decades, making these advancements an invaluable aid for surgeons by essentially providing real-time virtual reconstruction of patient anatomy. The objectives of these navigation- and robot-guided procedures are to reduce the likelihood of neural and vascular injury, minimize hospitalization time, decrease bleeding and postoperative pain, shorten healing time, and lower infection rates.

METHODS

A unicentric, retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the preoperative and postoperative clinical and radiographic outcomes of the first Latin American patients diagnosed with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent lumbar interbody fusion at the L4-L5 level via prone-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion-single position prone access.

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients (40 assisted by fluoroscopy, 40 assisted by robotics) with 320 percutaneous pedicle screws were evaluated. The primary outcomes analyzed and compared were radiation exposure per screw (seconds), skin-to-skin operative time (minutes), and recovery time (days). Secondary outcomes included lumbar pain intensity (visual analog scale), reported functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and any potential complications. All secondary outcomes were collected at the postoperative time.

CONCLUSION

Comparing minimally invasive spine interventions with free-hand instrumentation and robotic instrumentation, a statistically significant difference was identified in radiation exposure per screw and surgical time. The literature on Cirq Robotic is limited; however, minimally invasive spine surgery with robotic assistance appears advantageous in terms of radiation exposure and surgical time.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSION

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.

Fully automated determination of robotic pedicle screw accuracy and precision utilizing computer vision algorithms

Historically, pedicle screw accuracy measurements have relied on CT and expert visual assessment of the position of pedicle screws relative to preoperative plans. Proper pedicle screw placement is necessary to avoid complications, cost and morbidity of revision procedures. The aim of this study was to determine accuracy and precision of pedicle screw insertion via a novel computer vision algorithm using preoperative and postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans. Three cadaveric specimens were utilized. Screw placement planning on preoperative CT was performed according to standard clinical practice. Two experienced surgeons performed bilateral T2-L4 instrumentation using robotic-assisted navigation. Postoperative CT scans of the instrumented levels were obtained. Automated segmentation and computer vision techniques were employed to align each preoperative vertebra with its postoperative counterpart and then compare screw positions along all three axes. Registration accuracy was assessed by preoperatively embedding spherical markers (tantalum beads) to measure discrepancies in landmark alignment. Eighty-eight pedicle screws were placed in 3 cadavers' spines. Automated registrations between pre- and postoperative CT achieved sub-voxel accuracy. For the screw tip and tail, the mean three-dimensional errors were 1.67 mm and 1.78 mm, respectively. Mean angular deviation of screw axes from plan was 1.58°. For screw mid-pedicular accuracy, mean absolute error in the medial-lateral and superior-inferior directions were 0.75 mm and 0.60 mm, respectively. This study introduces automated algorithms for determining accuracy and precision of planned pedicle screws. Our accuracy outcomes are comparable or superior to recent robotic-assisted in vivo and cadaver studies. This computerized workflow establishes a standardized protocol for assessing pedicle screw placement accuracy and precision and provides detailed 3D translational and angular accuracy and precision for baseline comparison.

Proficiency Development and Learning Curve in Robot-Assisted Spine Surgery Using the ExcelsiusGPS® System: Experience From a Single Institution

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort Study Objectives: Robot-assisted spine surgery (RASS) is a rapidly evolving technique with potential benefits for improving surgical outcomes. A number of studies on RASS learning curve have focused on early iterations of the Mazor robot. Limited research exists on the learning curve associated with using the Globus Medical ExcelsiusGPS® system. In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the learning curve of RASS using the ExcelsiusGPS® system at a single institution.

METHODS

A total of 95 patients (541 screws) who underwent RASS between 2021 and 2022 were included. Variables including operative time, robot registration time, screw placement time, fluoroscopy utilization, and complications were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and two-sample t-tests.

RESULTS

The average operative time significantly decreased after the first 14 cases, indicating a learning curve. However, no significant improvement was observed in robot registration time. Notably, screw placement time significantly improved after approximately 13 cases. When controlling for the number of levels fused, the trends remained consistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed the presence of a learning curve in RASS using the ExcelsiusGPS® system and demonstrated rapid proficiency development. Our findings highlight the relatively quick learning curve of 1 RASS system.

Decreasing the Pedicle Screw Misplacement Rate in the Thoracic Spine With Robot-guided Navigation

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the screw accuracy of thoracic pedicle screws placed with a robot-guided navigation system.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Thoracic pedicles are smaller in diameter than lumbar pedicles, making pedicle screw placement difficult. Misplaced pedicle screws may present complications including decreased construct stability, and increased risks of neurological deficits and blood vessel perforation. There is a dearth of knowledge on thoracic pedicle screw accuracy placed with a robot.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the robot-assisted placement of thoracic pedicle screws was performed. Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans of the implanted thoracic screws were collected to assess screw placement accuracy, pedicle breadth, and placement deviations. A CT-based Gertzbein and Robbins System was used to classify pedicle screw accuracy in 2 mm increments. A custom image overlay software was used to determine the deviations between the preoperatively planned trajectory of pedicle screws and final placement at screw entry (tail), and tip in addition to the angular deviation.

RESULTS

Seventy-five thoracic pedicle screws were implanted by navigated robotic guidance in 17 patients, only 1.3% (1/75) were repositioned intraoperatively. Average patient age and body mass index were 57.5 years and 25.9 kg/m 2 , respectively, with 52.9% female patients. Surgery diagnoses were degenerative disk disease (47.1%) and adjacent segment disease (17.6%). There were zero complications, with no returns to the operating room. According to the CT-based Gertzbein and Robbins pedicle screw breach classification system, 93.3% (70/75) screws were grade A or B, 6.6% (5/75) were grade C, and 0% were grade D or E. The average deviation from the preoperative plan to actual final placement was 1.8±1.3 mm for the screw tip, 1.6±0.9 mm for the tail, and 2.1±1.5 degrees of angulation.

CONCLUSIONS

The current investigation found a 93.3% accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine. Navigated robot assistance is a useful system for placing screws in the smaller pedicles of the thoracic spine.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective nonexperimental study.

Revolutionizing orthopedics: a comprehensive review of robot-assisted surgery, clinical outcomes, and the future of patient care

Robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery (RAOS) is revolutionizing the field, offering the potential for increased accuracy and precision and improved patient outcomes. This comprehensive review explores the historical perspective, current robotic systems, advantages and limitations, clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, future developments, and innovation in RAOS. Based on systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and recent studies, this article highlights the most significant findings and compares RAOS to conventional techniques. As robotic-assisted surgery continues to evolve, clinicians and researchers must stay informed and adapt their practices to provide optimal patient care. Evidence from published studies corroborates these claims, highlighting superior component positioning, decreased incidence of complications, and heightened patient satisfaction. However, challenges such as costs, learning curves, and technical issues must be resolved to fully capitalize on these advantages.

Prospective Comparison of Two Robotically Navigated Pedicle Screw Instrumentation Techniques

This study aimed to compare screw accuracy and incidence of skive between two robotically navigated instrumented techniques in posterior spine fusion surgery: manual anti-skive instrumentation with an anti-skive cannula (ASC) and the use of a navigated, high-speed drill (HSD). Over a 3-year period, consecutive patients are undergoing RNA posterior fusion surgery with either ASC (n = 53) or HSD (n = 63). Both groups met a value of approximately 292 screws in our analysis (296 ASC, 294 HSD), which was determined by a biostatistician at an academic institution. Screw accuracy and skive was analyzed using preoperative CT and intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) fluoroscopy. Among 590 planned robotically inserted pedicle screws (296 ASC, 294 HSD), 245 ASC screws (82.8%) and 283 HSD screws (96.3%) were successfully inserted (p < 0.05). Skive events occurred in 4/283 (1.4%) HSD screws and 15/245 (6.2%) ASC screws (p < 0.05). HSD screws showed better accuracy in the axial and sagittal planes, being closer to planned trajectories in all directions except cranial deviation (p < 0.05). Additionally, HSD had a significantly lower time per screw (1.9 ± 1.0 min) compared to ASC (3.2 ± 2.0 min, p < 0.001). No adverse clinical effects were observed. The HSD technique showed significant improvements in time and screw accuracy compared to ASC. Biplanar fluoroscopy and 3D imaging resulted in significantly lower radiation exposure and time compared to ASC. These significant findings in the HSD group may be attributed to the lower occurrence of malpositioned screws, leading to a decrease in the need for second authentication. This represents a notable iterative improvement of the RNA platform.

100 Complex posterior spinal fusion cases performed with robotic instrumentation

Robotic navigation has been shown to increase precision, accuracy, and safety during spinal reconstructive procedures. There is a paucity of literature describing the best techniques for robotic-assisted spine surgery for complex, multilevel cases or in cases of significant deformity correction. We present a case series of 100 consecutive multilevel posterior spinal fusion procedures performed for multilevel spinal disease and/or deformity correction. 100 consecutive posterior spinal fusions were performed for multilevel disease and/or deformity correction utilizing robotic-assisted placement of pedicle screws. The primary outcome was surgery-related failure, which was defined as hardware breakage or reoperation with removal of hardware. A total of 100 consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. Among cases included, 31 were revision surgeries with existing hardware in place. The mean number of levels fused was 5.6, the mean operative time was 303 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 469 mL. 28 cases included robotic-assisted placement of S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws. In total, 1043 pedicle screws and 53 S2AI screws were placed with robotic-assistance. The failure rate using survivorship analysis was 18/1043 (1.7%) and the failure rate of S2AI screws using survivorship analysis was 3/53 (5.7%). Four patients developed postoperative wound infections requiring irrigation and debridement procedures. None of the 1043 pedicle screws nor the 53 S2AI screws required reoperation due to malpositioning or suboptimal placement. This case series of 100 multilevel posterior spinal fusion procedures demonstrates promising results with low failure rates. With 1043 pedicle screws and 53 S2AI screws, we report low failure rates of 1.7% and 5.7%, respectively with zero cases of screw malpositioning. Robotic screw placement allows for accurate screw placement with no increased rate of postoperative infection compared to historical controls. Level of evidence: IV, Retrospective review.

Da Vinci Meets Globus Excelsius GPS: A Totally Robotic Minimally Invasive Anterior and Posterior Lumbar Fusion

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches to the spine via anterior and posterior approaches have been increasing in popularity, culminating in the development of robot-assisted spinal fusions. The da Vinci surgical robot has been used for anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), with promising results. Similarly, multiple spinal robots have been developed to assist placement of posterior pedicle screws. However, no previous cases have reported on using robots for both anterior and posterior fixation in a single surgery. We present a technical note on the first reported case of a totally robotic minimally invasive anterior and posterior lumbar fusion and instrumentation.

METHODS

A 65-year-old man with chronic low back pain and left greater than right lower extremity radiculopathy was found to have grade 1 spondylolisthesis at L5/S1 that worsened on standing upright. He underwent ALIF using a da Vinci robotic approach, followed by percutaneous posterior instrumented fusion with the Globus Excelsius GPS robot.

RESULTS

The patient did well postoperatively, with improvement of back and leg pain at 3 months follow-up. Radiography confirmed appropriate placement of the interbody cage and pedicle screws.

CONCLUSIONS

All-robotic placement of both ALIF and posterior lumbar pedicle fixation may be safe, feasible, and efficacious.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSION

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.

Protocol for Electrical Conductivity Signal Collection and Processing in Scoliosis Surgery

Introduction

Pedicle screw placement is a common procedure in spinal surgery. The misplacement rate with lateral and medial cortical perforation is 5-11%. Several techniques are used to decrease this rate. Many studies proved that electrical conductivity increases accuracy during pedicle screw placement but no study has interpreted conductivity values.

Methods

The data are collected from patients operated for scoliosis in a single university hospital. After the posterior surgical approach is made, each pedicle is prepared classically. Instead of the classic curved pedicle probe, the surgeon uses a probe with the same shape that measures the conductivity at its tip. Conductivity values are recorded through a Bluetooth application. Each pedicle trajectory is then qualified after manual palpation with a feeler. A trajectory is qualified as optimal when palpation shows a bone tunnel without any breach, breached when there was a breach, and a modification of the probe direction was needed. A trajectory that does not meet the abovementioned definitions is excluded from the statistical analysis.

Results

21 patients with 457 pedicles are recorded. The average age of the population is 14.71 ± 1.86 years. 17 patients (81%) have idiopathic adolescent scoliosis. One patient has Rett syndrome, one has hypotonia, one has cerebral palsy, and one has congenital malformation. The depth of the instrument is measured semiautomatically. This technique is validated when compared with the manual technique using the Bland-Altman agreement method (mean differences = -0.279 mm, upper limit = 2.2 mm, and lower limit = -2.7 mm) and Deming regression (slope = 1.06 ± 0.004).

Conclusion

This study establishes a protocol to collect electrical conductivity signals in spine surgery with synchronization to the depth of the instrument. Real-time conductivity signal feedback alerts the surgeon of a probable breach in the spinal canal, so he can change the direction of the pedicle aim.

Floor-Mounted Robotic Pedicle Screw Placement in Lumbar Spine Surgery: An Analysis of 1,050 Screws

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the usage of floor-mounted robot in minimally invasive lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar fusion for degenerative pathology using floor-mounted robot (ExcelsiusGPS) were included. Pedicle screw accuracy, proximal level violation rate, pedicle screw size, screw-related complications, and robot abandonment rate were analyzed.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-nine patients were included. Most surgeries were primary single-level fusion. Sixty-five percent of surgeries had intraoperative computed tomography (CT) workflow, 35% had preoperative CT workflow. Sixty-six percent were transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, 16% were lateral, 8% were anterior, and 10% were a combined approach. A total of 1,050 screws were placed with robotic assistance (85% in prone position, 15% in lateral position). Postoperative CT scan was available for 80 patients (419 screws). Overall pedicle screw accuracy rate was 96.4% (prone, 96.7%; lateral, 94.2%; primary, 96.7%; revision, 95.3%). Overall poor screw placement rate was 2.8% (prone, 2.7%; lateral, 3.8%; primary, 2.7%; revision, 3.5%). Overall proximal facet and endplate violation rates were 0.4% and 0.9%. Average diameter and length of pedicle screws were 7.1 mm and 47.7 mm. Screw revision had to be done for 1 screw (0.1%). Use of the robot had to be aborted in 2 cases (0.8%).

CONCLUSION

Usage of floor-mounted robotics for the placement of lumbar pedicle screws leads to excellent accuracy, large screw size, and negligible screw-related complications. It does so for screw placement in prone/lateral position and primary/revision surgery alike with negligible robot abandonment rates.

A Comparison of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Accuracy Between Robotic Navigation and Novel Fluoroscopy-Based Instrument Tracking for Patients Undergoing Instrumented Thoracolumbar Surgery

BACKGROUND

The accuracy of pedicle screws placed with instrument tracking and robotic navigation are individually comparable or superior to placement using standard fluoroscopy, however head-to-head comparisons between these adjuncts in a similar surgical population have yet to be performed.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous thoracic and lumbosacral spinal instrumentation were retrospectively enrolled. Instrumentation was performed using either fluoroscopy-based instrument tracking system (TrackX, TrackX Technologies) or robotic-navigation (ExcelsiusGPS, Globus Medical). Postinstrumentation computed tomography scans were graded for breach according to the Gertzbein-Robbins scale, with "acceptable" screws deemed as Grade A or B and "unacceptable" screws deemed as Grades C through E. Accuracy data was compared between both instrumentation modalities.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients, comprising a total of 250 screws (167 robot, 83 instrument tracking) were included. The overall accuracy between both modalities was similar, with 96.4% and 97.6% of screws with acceptable accuracy between instrument tracking and robotic navigation, respectively (I-squared 0.30, df = 1, P = 0.58). Between instrument tracking and robotic navigation, 92.8% and 95.8% of screws received Grade A, 3.6% and 1.8% a Grade B, 1.2% and 1.2% a Grade C, 1.2% and 0.6% a Grade D, and 1.2% and 0.6% a Grade E, respectively. The robot was abandoned intraoperatively in 2 cases due to unrecoverable registration inaccuracy or software failure, leading to abandonment of 8 potential screws (4.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a similar patient population, there is a similarly high degree of instrumentation accuracy between fluoroscopy-based instrument tracking and robotic navigation. There is a rare chance for screw breach with either surgical adjunct.

A Retrospective Analysis of Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy Using the ExcelsiusGPS Robotic Guidance System: Case Series

BACKGROUND

Robotic guidance has become widespread in spine surgery. Although the intent is improved screw placement, further system-specific data are required to substantiate this intention for pedicle screws in spinal stabilization constructs.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the accuracy of pedicle screws placed with the aid of a robot in a cohort of patients immediately after the adoption of the robot-assisted surgery technique.

METHODS

A retrospective, Institutional Review Board-approved study was performed on the first 100 patients at a single facility, who had undergone spinal surgeries with the use of robotic techniques. Pedicle screw accuracy was graded using the Gertzbein-Robbins Scale based on pedicle wall breach, with grade A representing 0 mm breach and successive grades increasing breach thresholds by 2 mm increments. Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography scans were also used to assess offsets between the objective plan and true screw placements.

RESULTS

A total of 326 screws were analyzed among 72 patients with sufficient imaging data. Ages ranged from 21 to 84 years. The total accuracy rate based on the Gertzbein-Robbins Scale was 97.5%, and the rate for each grade is as follows: A, 82%; B, 15.5%; C, 1.5%; D, 1%; and E, 0. The average tip offset was 1.9 mm, the average tail offset was 2.0 mm, and the average angular offset was 2.6°.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted surgery allowed for accurate implantation of pedicle screws on immediate adoption of this technique. There were no complications attributable to the robotic technique, and no hardware revisions were required.

[Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement]

OBJECTIVE

Pedicle screw-based posterior instrumentation of the spine.

INDICATIONS

Instability of the spine due to trauma, infection, degenerative spinal disease or tumor.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

None.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Robot-assisted navigated pedicle screw placement.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Early functional mobilization starting on the first postoperative day.

RESULTS

A study by Lee et al. analyzed the clinical application of the system Mazor X Stealth Edition (Medtronic Navigation, Louisville, CO, USA; Medtronic Spine, Memphis, TN, USA) in 186 cases with a total of 1445 pedicle screws [1]. Correct screw positioning was achieved in 1432 pedicle screws (99.1%); six pedicle screws (0.4%) were revised intraoperatively. The mean duration of pedicle screw placement was 6.1 ± 2.3 min. Pojskić et al. published a case series regarding the application of the system Cirq (Brainlab, Munich, Germany) in 13 cases with a total number of 70 pedicle screws implanted [2]. Intraoperative imaging showed screw positioning according to the Gertzbein Robbins classification (GR) category A in 65 screws (92.9%) and GR B in one screw (1.4%). Screw positioning GR D with intraoperative revision was reported in two screws (2.9%). Mean duration of pedicle screw placement was 08:27 ± 06:54 min.

Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement in Robot-Assisted Surgery: A Multicenter Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective multicenter.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to investigate the factors involved in, and their relative contributions to, the overall accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Robot-assisted surgery has reportedly resulted in greater accuracy for placement of pedicle screws than conventional methods. There are many potential factors affecting the accuracy of pedicle screws placed with a robot. No study has investigated these factors in a robust way.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiographic and clinical data of three centers were pooled. Preoperative and postoperative computerized tomographies were obtained by all three centers to assess the accuracy of the placed screws. The primary outcome measured was accuracy of pedicle screws placed with the robot. The authors performed a multivariate regression analysis to determine the significant patient-related and screw-related variables and their relative contribution to the overall accuracy. In addition, an ordinal regression analysis was conducted to investigate the effects of different variables on accuracy of robot-placed screws graded by Gertzbein-Robbins grading system (GRS).

RESULTS

The total contribution of all studied variables to overall accuracy variation as measured by offsets between the placed and planned screws was only 18%. Obesity, long constructs, female gender, surgeon, and vertebral levels were among the factors that had small contributions to the different screw offsets. For GRS grades, significant variables were gender (Log odds: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.38-0.85), age (Log odds: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.01-0.03), length of constructs (Log odds: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02-0.11), screw diameter (Log odds: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.39-0.71), and length of the screws (Log odds: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01-0.05). However, these variables too, regardless of their significant association with the accuracy of placed screws, had little contribution to overall variability of accuracy itself (only about 7%).

CONCLUSION

The accuracy of screws placed with robotic assistance, as graded by GRS or measured offsets between planned and placed screw trajectories, is minimally affected by different patient-related or screw-related variables due to the robustness of the robotic navigation system used in this study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Robotic-assisted spine surgery allows for increased pedicle screw sizes while still improving safety as indicated by elevated triggered electromyographic thresholds

The present study used triggered electromyographic (EMG) testing as a tool to determine the safety of pedicle screw placement. In this Institutional Review Board exempt review, data from 151 consecutive patients (100 robotic; 51 non-robotic) who had undergone instrumented spinal fusion surgery of the thoracic, lumbar, or sacral regions were analyzed. The sizes of implanted pedicle screws and EMG threshold data were compared between screws that were placed immediately before and after adoption of the robotic technique. The robotic group had significantly larger screws inserted that were wider (7 ± 0.7 vs 6.5 ± 0.3 mm; p < 0.001) and longer (47.8 ± 6.4 vs 45.7 ± 4.3 mm; p < 0.001). The robotic group also had significantly higher stimulation thresholds (34.0 ± 11.9 vs 30.2 ± 9.8 mA; p = 0.002) of the inserted screws. The robotic group stayed in the hospital postoperatively for fewer days (2.3 ± 1.2 vs 2.9 ± 2 days; p = 0.04), but had longer surgery times (174 ± 37.8 vs 146 ± 41.5 min; p < 0.001). This study demonstrated that the use of navigated, robot-assisted surgery allowed for placement of larger pedicle screws without compromising safety, as determined by pedicle screw stimulation thresholds. Future studies should investigate whether these effects become even stronger in a later cohort after surgeons have more experience with the robotic technique. It should also be evaluated whether the larger screw sizes allowed by the robotic technology actually translate into improved long-term clinical outcomes.

A Comparison of Spinal Robotic Systems and Pedicle Screw Accuracy Rates: Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

Introduction  The motivation to improve accuracy and reduce complication rates in spinal surgery has driven great advancements in robotic surgical systems, with the primary difference between the newer generation and older generation models being the presence of an optical camera and multijointed arm. This study compares accuracy and complication rates of pedicle screw placement in older versus newer generation robotic systems reported in the literature. Methods  We performed a systemic review and meta-analysis describing outcomes of pedicle screw placement with robotic spine surgery. We assessed the robustness of these findings by quantifying levels of cross-study heterogeneity and publication bias. Finally, we performed meta-regression to test for associations between pedicle screw accuracy and older versus newer generation robotic spine system usage. Results  Average pedicle screw placement accuracy rates for old and new generation robotic platforms were 97 and 99%, respectively. Use of new generation robots was significantly associated with improved pedicle screw placement accuracy ( p  = 0.03). Conclusion  Accuracy of pedicle screw placement was high across all generations of robotic surgical systems. However, newer generation robots were shown to be significantly associated with accurate pedicle screw placement, showing the benefits of upgrading robotic systems with a real-time optical camera and multijointed arm.

Safety and risk factors of TINAVI robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery

Objective

To determine the rates and risk factors of pedicle screw placement accuracy and the proximal facet joint violation (FJV) using TINAVI robot-assisted technique.

Methods

Patients with thoracolumbar fractures or degenerative diseases were retrospectively recruited from June 2018 and June 2020. The pedicle penetration and proximal FJV were compared in different instrumental levels to identify the safe and risk segments during insertion. Moreover, the factors were also assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

A total of 72 patients with 332 pedicle screws were included in the current study. The optimal and clinically acceptable screw positions were 85.8% and 93.4%. Of the 332 screws concerning the intra-pedicular accuracy, 285 screws (85.8%) were evaluated as Grade A according to the Gertzbein and Robbins scale, with the remaining 25 (7.6%), 10 (3.0%), 6 (1.8%), and 6 screws (1.8%) as Grades B, C, D, and E. Moreover, in terms of the proximal FJV, 255 screws (76.8%) screws were assessed as Grade 0 according to the Babu scale, with the remaining 34 (10.3%), 22 (6.6%), and 21 screws (6.3%) as Grades 1, 2, and 3. Furthermore, the univariate analysis showed significantly higher rate of penetration for patients with age < 61 years old, sex of female, thoracolumbar insertion, shorter distance from skin to insertion point, and smaller facet angle. Meanwhile, the patients with the sex of female, BMI < 25.9, grade I spondylolisthesis, lumbosacral insertion, longer distance from skin to insertion point, and larger facet angle had a significantly higher rate of proximal FJV. The outcomes of multivariate analyses showed that sex of male (adjusted OR 0.320, 95% CI 0.140–0.732; p = 0.007), facet angle ≥ 45° (adjusted OR 0.266, 95% CI 0.090–0.786; p = 0.017), distance from skin to insertion point ≥ 4.5 cm (adjusted OR 0.342, 95% CI 0.134–0.868; p = 0.024), and lumbosacral instrumentation (adjusted OR 0.227, 95% CI 0.091–0.566; p = 0.001) were independently associated with intra-pedicular accuracy; the L5 insertion (adjusted OR 2.020, 95% CI 1.084–3.766; p = 0.027) and facet angle ≥ 45° (adjusted OR 1.839, 95% CI 1.026–3.298; p = 0.041) were independently associated with the proximal FJV.

Conclusion

TINAVI robot-assisted technique was associated with a high rate of pedicle screw placement and a low rate of proximal FJV. This new technique showed a safe and precise performance for pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery. Facet angle ≥ 45° is independently associated with both the intra-pedicular accuracy and proximal FJV.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03271-6.

Comparison of accuracy and safety between second-generation TiRobot-assisted and free-hand thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement

Background

Robot-assisted spine surgery aims to improve the accuracy of screw placement. We compared the accuracy and safety between a novel robot and free hand in thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement.

Methods

Eighty patients scheduled to undergo robot-assisted (40 patients) and free-hand (40 patients) pedicle screw placement were included. The patients’ demographic characteristics, radiographic accuracy, and perioperative outcomes were compared. The accuracy of screw placement was based on cortical violation and screw deviation. Safety outcomes mainly included operative time, blood loss, revision, and complications.

Results

A total of 178 and 172 screws were placed in the robot-assisted and free-hand groups, respectively. The rate of perfect screw position (grade A) was higher in the robot-assisted group than in the free-hand group (91.0% vs. 75.6%; P < 0.001). The rate of clinically acceptable screw position (grades A and B) was also higher in the robot-assisted group than in the free-hand group (99.4% vs. 90.1%; P < 0.001). The robot-assisted group had significantly lower screw deviation than the free-hand group [1.46 (0.94, 1.95) mm vs. 2.48 (1.09, 3.74) mm, P < 0.001]. There was no robot abandonment in the robot-assisted group. No revision was required in any of the groups.

Conclusions

Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is more accurate than free-hand placement. The second-generation TiRobot–assisted thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement is an accurate and safe procedure.

Trial registration retrospectively registered

The Future of Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery

Strong forces are pushing minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) to the forefront of spine care. Less-invasive surgical techniques have been enabled by a variety of technical advances. Despite the promise of MISS, however, several factors, including few training opportunities, perception of a steep learning curve, and high upfront costs, have limited the adoption of these techniques. The "6 T's" is a framework highlighting key factors that must be accounted for to ensure safe and effective MISS as techniques continually evolve. Further, technological advancement in endoscopy, robotics, and augmented/virtual reality is enhancing minimally invasive surgeries to make them even less invasive and safer for patients. The evolution of these new techniques and technologies is driving the future of MISS.

Innovations in Spinal Endoscopy

Innovations in spinal endoscopy technology and technique have broadened their applications during the past 10 years. Smaller outer-diameter working-channel endoscopes have permitted safe usage in the cervical spine for full endoscopic decompressions. Endoscopic fusions have now been widely reported, leveraging compatible instrumentation for disc preparation and expandable interbody grafts. This ultra-minimally invasive technique has also enabled the performance of fusion procedures in awake patients under monitored anesthesia care, affording speedier recovery and treatment options for those unable to undergo general anesthesia. Revision surgery after open or minimally invasive posterior discectomy or instrumentation can now be performed with endoscopic techniques, which often leverage the transforaminal approach to avoid scar tissue and adhesions. These procedures, among other endoscopic surgeries, are now being increasingly performed in ambulatory surgery centers, as safe outcomes, economic benefits to the healthcare system, and patients' desire to recover at home are becoming more apparent. Finally, the standardization of endoscopic terminology, which has long been a confounder to proper communication and education in this field, has recently been addressed by leading experts in a consensus document, which will serve as the foundation for future collaborative advancements.

Comparative Analysis of Optoelectronic Accuracy in the Laboratory Setting Versus Clinical Operative Environment: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

The optoelectronic camera source and data interpolation process serve as the foundation for navigational integrity in robotic-assisted surgical platforms. The current systematic review serves to provide a basis for the numerical disparity observed when comparing the intrinsic accuracy of optoelectronic cameras versus accuracy in the laboratory setting and clinical operative environments.

METHODS

Review of the PubMed and Cochrane Library research databases was performed. The exhaustive literature compilation obtained was then vetted to reduce redundancies and categorized into topics of intrinsic accuracy, registration accuracy, musculoskeletal kinematic platforms, and clinical operative platforms.

RESULTS

A total of 465 references were vetted and 137 comprise the basis for the current analysis. Regardless of application, the common denominators affecting overall optoelectronic accuracy are intrinsic accuracy, registration accuracy, and application accuracy. Intrinsic accuracy equaled or was less than 0.1 mm translation and 0.1 degrees rotation per fiducial. Controlled laboratory platforms reported 0.1 to 0.5 mm translation and 0.1 to 1.0 degrees rotation per array. Accuracy in robotic-assisted spinal surgery reported 1.5 to 6.0 mm translation and 1.5 to 5.0 degrees rotation when comparing planned to final implant position.

CONCLUSIONS

Navigational integrity and maintenance of fidelity of optoelectronic data is the cornerstone of robotic-assisted spinal surgery. Transitioning from controlled laboratory to clinical operative environments requires an increased number of steps in the optoelectronic kinematic chain and error potential. Diligence in planning, fiducial positioning, system registration and intra-operative workflow have the potential to improve accuracy and decrease disparity between planned and final implant position.

Do People Trust in Robot-Assisted Surgery? Evidence from Europe

(1) Background: The goal of the paper was to establish the factors that influence how people feel about having a medical operation performed on them by a robot. (2) Methods: Data were obtained from a 2017 Flash Eurobarometer (number 460) of the European Commission with 27,901 citizens aged 15 years and over in the 28 countries of the European Union. Logistic regression (odds ratios, OR) to model the predictors of trust in robot-assisted surgery was calculated through motivational factors, using experience and sociodemographic independent variables. (3) Results: The results obtained indicate that, as the experience of using robots increases, the predictive coefficients related to information, attitude, and perception of robots become more negative. Furthermore, sociodemographic variables played an important predictive role. The effect of experience on trust in robots for surgical interventions was greater among men, people between 40 and 54 years old, and those with higher educational levels. (4) Conclusions: The results show that trust in robots goes beyond rational decision-making, since the final decision about whether it should be a robot that performs a complex procedure like a surgical intervention depends almost exclusively on the patient’s wishes.

Application of a new percutaneous multi-function pedicle locator in minimally invasive spine surgery

In this study, a new percutaneous multi-function pedicle locator was designed for personalized three-dimensional positioning of a pedicle in minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) without computer-assisted navigation technology. The proposed locator was used in a number of patients during MISS, and its advantages were analyzed. Based on the position of a pedicle determined by computed tomography (CT) and fluoroscopic images of a patient, 6 lines and 2 distances were used to determine the puncture point of a pedicle screw on skin, while 2 angles were used to indicate the direction of insertion of a pedicle guide needle from the patient's body surface. The results of the proposed locator were compared with those of the conventional freehand technique in MISS. The potential benefits of using the locator included enhanced surgical accuracy, reduced operation time, alleviation of the harmful intra-operative radiation exposure, lower costs, and shortened learning curve for young orthopedists.

Image Guidance in Spinal Surgery: A Critical Appraisal and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

Image-guided spinal surgery (IGSS) underwent rapid development over the past decades. The goal of IGSS is to increase patient safety and improve workflow. We present an overview of the history of IGSS, illustrate its current state, and highlight future developments. Currently, IGSS requires an image set, a tracking system, and a calibration method.

IMAGING

Two-dimensional images have many disadvantages as a source for navigation. Currently, the most common navigation technique is three-dimensional (3D) navigation based on cross-sectional imaging techniques such as cone-beam computed tomography (CT) or fan-beam CT.

TRACKING

Electromagnetic tracking uses an electromagnetic field to localize instruments. Optical tracking using infrared cameras has currently become one of the most common tracking methods in IGSS.

CALIBRATION

The three most common techniques currently used are the point-matching registration technique, the surface-matching registration technique, and the automated registration technique.

FUTURE

Augmented reality (AR) describes a computer-generated image that can be superimposed onto the real-world environment. Marking pathologies and anatomical landmarks are a few examples of many possible future applications. Additionally, AR offers a wide range of possibilities in surgical training. The latest development in IGSS is robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). The presently available data on RAS are very encouraging, but further improvements of these procedures is expected.

CONCLUSION

IGSS significantly evolved since its inception and is becoming a routinely used technology. In the future, IGSS will combine the advantages of "active/freehand 3D navigation" with AR and RAS and will one day find its way into all aspects of spinal surgery, not only in instrumented procedures.

Accuracy of Robotic-Assisted Spinal Surgery-Comparison to TJR Robotics, da Vinci Robotics, and Optoelectronic Laboratory Robotics

BACKGROUND

The optoelectronic camera source and data interpolation serve as the foundation for navigational integrity in the robotic-assisted surgical platform. The objective of the current systematic review serves to provide a basis for the numerical disparity that exists when comparing the intrinsic accuracy of optoelectronic cameras: accuracy observed in the laboratory setting versus accuracy in the clinical operative environment. It is postulated that there exists a greater number of connections in the optoelectronic kinematic chain when analyzing the clinical operative environment to the laboratory setting. This increase in data interpolation, coupled with intraoperative workflow challenges, reduces the degree of accuracy based on surgical application and to that observed in controlled musculoskeletal kinematic laboratory investigations.

METHODS

Review of the PubMed and Cochrane Library research databases was performed. The exhaustive literature compilation obtained was then vetted to reduce redundancies and categorized into topics of intrinsic optoelectronic accuracy, registration accuracy, musculoskeletal kinematic platforms, and clinical operative platforms.

RESULTS

A total of 147 references make up the basis for the current analysis. Regardless of application, the common denominators affecting overall optoelectronic accuracy are intrinsic accuracy, registration accuracy, and application accuracy. Intrinsic accuracy of optoelectronic tracking equaled or was less than 0.1 mm of translation and 0.1° of rotation per fiducial. Controlled laboratory platforms reported 0.1 to 0.5 mm of translation and 0.1°-1.0° of rotation per array. There is a huge falloff in clinical applications: accuracy in robotic-assisted spinal surgery reported 1.5 to 6.0 mm of translation and 1.5° to 5.0° of rotation when comparing planned to final implant position. Total Joint Robotics and da Vinci urologic robotics computed accuracy, as predicted, lies between these two extremes-1.02 mm for da Vinci and 2 mm for MAKO.

CONCLUSIONS

Navigational integrity and maintenance of fidelity of optoelectronic data is the cornerstone of robotic-assisted spinal surgery. Transitioning from controlled laboratory to clinical operative environments requires an increased number of steps in the optoelectronic kinematic chain and error potential. Diligence in planning, fiducial positioning, system registration, and intraoperative workflow have the potential to improve accuracy and decrease disparity between planned and final implant position. The key determining factors limiting navigation resolution accuracy are highlighted by this Cochrane research analysis.

Overview of Robotic Technology in Spine Surgery

As robotics in spine surgery has progressed over the past 2 decades, studies have shown mixed results on its clinical outcomes and economic impact. In this review, we highlight the evolution of robotic technology over the past 30 years, discussing early limitations and failures. We provide an overview of the history and evolution of currently available spinal robotic platforms and compare and contrast the available features of each. We conclude by summarizing the literature on robotic instrumentation accuracy in pedicle screw placement and clinical outcomes such as complication rates and briefly discuss the future of robotic spine surgery.

The current state of navigation in robotic spine surgery

The advent and widespread adoption of pedicle screw instrumentation prompted the need for image guidance in spine surgery to improve accuracy and safety. Although the conventional method, fluoroscopy, is readily available and inexpensive, concerns regarding radiation exposure and the drive to provide better visual guidance spurred the development of computer-assisted navigation. Contemporaneously, a non-navigated robotic guidance platform was also introduced as a competing modality for pedicle screw placement. Although the robot could provide high precision trajectory guidance by restricting four of the six degrees of freedom (DOF), the lack of real-time depth control and high capital acquisition cost diminished its popularity, while computer-assisted navigation platforms became increasingly sophisticated and accepted. The recent integration of real-time 3D navigation with robotic platforms has resulted in a resurgence of interest in robotics in spine surgery with the recent introduction of numerous navigated robotic platforms. The currently available navigated robotic spine surgery platforms include the ROSA Spine Robot (Zimmer Biomet Robotics formerly Medtech SA, Montpellier, France), ExcelsiusGPS^® (Globus Medical, Inc., Audubon, PA, USA), Mazor X spine robot (Medtronic Navigation Louisville, CO; Medtronic Spine, Memphis, TN; formerly Mazor Robotics, Caesarea, Israel) and TiRobot (TINAVI Medical Technologies, Beijing, China). Here we provide an overview of these navigated spine robotic platforms, existing applications, and potential future avenues of implementation.

Comparison of Cranial Facet Joint Violation Rate and Four Other Clinical Indexes Between Robot-assisted and Freehand Pedicle Screw Placement in Spine Surgery: A Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Through meta-analysis, whether RA techniques are superior to conventional freehand (FH) techniques was determined in terms of cranial facet joint protection and four other clinical indexes, namely, the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, the number of surgical revision due to malposition, intraoperative radiation dose, and operative time.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cranial facet joint violation (FJV) is an important risk factor for adjacent segment degeneration. Some studies recommended the use of robot-assisted (RA) pedicle screw placement in reducing the rate of cranial FJV instead of conventional FH pedicle screw placement. However, the superiority of RA techniques to FH techniques remains controversial.

METHODS

A comprehensive search on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, CNKI, and WanFang was conducted for the selection of potential eligible literature. The outcomes were evaluated in terms of odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3. The subgroup analyses of the violation of the cranial facet joint and the accuracy of pedicle screw placement were performed on the basis of robot type.

RESULT

Three randomized controlled trials, two prospective cohort study, and one retrospective cohort study consisting of 783 patients and 2694 cranial pedicle screws were included in the meta-analysis. RA pedicle screw placement was associated with significantly fewer cranial FJVs than FH screw placement. Subgroup analyses showed that the Renaissance (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.07-0.56) and TINAVI (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.09-0.38) robots under RA techniques were associated with significantly fewer cranial FJVs than FH techniques. Furthermore, the RA techniques showed more accurate pedicle screw placement and lower intraoperative radiation dose, equivalent number of surgical revision due to malposition, but longer operative time than the FH techniques.

CONCLUSION

The RA (Renaissance and TINAVI) techniques are superior to conventional FH techniques in terms of protecting the cranial facet joint. RA techniques are accurate and safe in clinical application.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.