Accuracy of computer-assisted pedicle screw placement for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison between robotics and navigation

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.

Analysis of 5,070 consecutive pedicle screws placed utilizing robotically assisted surgical navigation in 334 patients by experienced pediatric spine deformity surgeons: surgical safety and early perioperative complications in pediatric posterior spinal fusion

PURPOSE

This study evaluates the intraoperative and short-term complications associated with robotically assisted pedicle screw placement in pediatric posterior spinal fusion (PSF) from three surgeons at two different institutions.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 334 pediatric patients who underwent PSF with robotic-assisted navigation at 2 institutions over 3 years (2020-2022). Five thousand seventy robotically placed screws were evaluated. Data collection focused on intraoperative and early postoperative complications with minimum 30-day follow-up. Patients undergoing revision procedures were excluded.

RESULTS

Intraoperative complications included 1 durotomy, 6 patients with neuromonitoring alerts not related to screw placement, and 62 screws (1.2%) with documented pedicle breaches, all of which were revised at time of surgery. By quartile, pedicle breaches statistically declined from first quartile to fourth quartile (1.8% vs. 0.56%, p < 0.05). No breach was associated with neuromonitoring changes or neurological sequelae. No spinal cord or vascular injuries occurred. Seventeen postoperative complications occurred in eleven (3.3%) of patients. There were five (1.5%) patients with unplanned return to the operating room.

CONCLUSION

Robotically assisted pedicle screw placement was safely and reliably performed on pediatric spinal deformity by three surgeons across two centers, demonstrating an acceptable safety profile and low incidence of unplanned return to the operating room.

Safety of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery: Experience from the initial 125 cases

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to evaluate the safety of robot-assisted screw placement in 125 cases after introducing a spinal robotics system and to identify the situations where deviation was likely to occur.

METHODS

The subjects were 125 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted screw placement using a spinal robotics system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic) from April 2021 to January 2023. The 1048 screws placed with robotic assistance were evaluated. We investigated intraoperative adverse events of the robotics system and complications occurring within 30 days after surgery. We evaluated screw accuracy and deviation and compared them for vertebral levels, screw insertion methods (open traditional pedicle screw [Open-PS], cortical bone trajectory screw [CBT], percutaneous pedicle screw [PPS], and S2 alar iliac screw [S2AIS]), diagnosis, and phases of surgical cases.

RESULTS

The deviation rate of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery was 2.2%. Complications were reoperation due to implant-related neurological deficit in 0.8% and surgical site infection in 0.8%. There was significant difference in the deviation rate between vertebral levels. The deviation rate of the T1-T4 level was high at 10.0%. There was significant difference in the deviation rate between Open-PS, CBT, PPS, and S2AIS. The PPSs had a high deviation rate of 10.3%. The deviation rates were not significantly different between patients with and without deformity. The deviation rate did not change depending on the experience of surgical cases, and the deviation rate was favorable from the onset.

CONCLUSION

Although the robotic-assisted screw placement was safe, we should be extra vigilant when placing screws in the upper thoracic region (deviation rate 10.0%) and when using PPSs (deviation rate 10.3%).

Treatment of lumbar disc herniation with robot combined with unilateral biportal endoscopic technology: A case report

BACKGROUND

This reported procedure combines the orthopedic surgical robot with the unilateral biportal endoscopy-lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-LIF), utilizing the UBE's wide viewing field and operating space to perform minimally invasive decompressive fusion of the lesioned segment, and the orthopedic surgical robot's intelligence and precision to perform percutaneous pedicle screw placement. The advancement of this procedure lies in the superposition of advantages and offsetting disadvantages of the two new technologies, and the maximum effect of treatment is achieved with maximum minimization of invasiveness and precision under the monitoring of imaging instruments to maximize the benefit of patients, and this review reports a case of multiple-segment lumbar decompression and fusion surgery for lumbar disc herniation via robot-assisted UBE for reference.

CASE SUMMARY

A 44-year-old patient presented to our hospital. Combining various clinical data, we diagnosed the patient with lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy, lumbar spondylolisthesis, and lumbar spinal stenosis. We developed a surgical plan of "UBE decompression + UBE-LIF + orthopedic surgery robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw implantation for internal fixation". The results were satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

We present an extremely rare case of multiple-segment lumbar decompression and fusion surgery for lumbar disc herniation via robot-assisted UBE and achieved good results. Therefore, the technique is worthy of clinical promotion.

[Intraoperative navigation of a distraction injury of the thoracic spine with very severe scoliotic alterations]

The case of a 43-year-old male patient is described, who suffered several injuries due to a traffic accident, including a distraction injury to the thoracic spine. A specific feature of this case was the existing spondylodesis with material fracture and secondary loss of reduction. Due to this, the guidewires of the pedicle screws were placed in a navigation pattern in the absence of adjustable pedicles and an abnormal screw corridor. This guarantees an optimal positioning with associated patient safety.

Comparison of Cervical Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy With Robotic Guidance System Versus Image Guidance System Using Propensity Score Matching

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy of cervical pedicle screw (CPS) placement using a robotic guidance system (RGS) with that of using an image guidance system (IGS; navigation system) through propensity score matching.

BACKGROUND

The RGS may provide accurate CPS placement, which may outperform IGS. However, no study has directly compared the accuracy of CPS placement with the RGS to that with the IGS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who had undergone cervical fusion surgery using CPS with the RGS or IGS. To adjust for potential confounders (patient demographic characteristics, disease etiology, and registration material), propensity score matching was performed, creating robotic guidance (RG) and matched image guidance (IG) groups. The accuracy of CPS placement from C2 to C6, where the vertebral artery runs, was evaluated on postoperative computed tomography images according to the Neo classification (grade 0 to grade 3). Furthermore, the intraoperative CPS revisions and related complications were examined.

RESULTS

Using propensity score matching, 22 patients were included in the RG and matched groups each, and a total of 95 and 105 CPSs, respectively, were included in the analysis. In both the axial and sagittal planes, the clinically acceptable rate (grades 0 + 1) of CPS placement did not differ between the RG and matched IG groups (97.9% vs 94.3% and 95.8% vs 96.2%, respectively). The incidence of CPS revision was similar between the groups (2.1% vs 2.9%), and no CPS-related complications were documented. Meanwhile, the incidence of lateral breach (grades 1 + 2 + 3) was significantly lower in the RG group than in the matched IG group (1.1% vs 7.7%, P= 0.037).

CONCLUSION

The RGS and IGS can equally aid in accurate and safe CPS placement in clinical settings. Nonetheless, RGS can further reduce the lateral breach, compared with IGS.

Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw implantation in scoliosis surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw implantation in scoliosis surgery. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023471837). Two independent researchers searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The outcomes included operation time, pedicle screw implantation time, blood loss, number of fluoroscopic, accuracy of pedicle screw position, hospital stays, postoperative hospital stays, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Scoliosis Research Society-22(SRS-22), cobb angle, cobb angle correction rate, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and complications. Eight papers involving 473 patients met all the criteria. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the reduction in operation time. The effect of reducing the pedicle screw implantation time in the RA group was significant (WMD = -1.28; 95% CI: -1.76 to -0.80; P < 0.00001). The effect of reducing the blood loss in the RA group was significant (WMD=-105.57; 95% CI: -206.84 to -4.31; P = 0.04). The effect of reducing the number of fluoroscopic in the RA group was significant (WMD=-5.93; 95% CI: -8.24 to -3.62; P < ). The pedicle screw position of Grade A was significantly more in the RA group according to both the Gertzbein-Robbins scale and the Rampersaud scale. Compared with the FA group, the difference in the hospital stays in the RA group was not statistically significant, but the effect of reducing the postoperative hospital stays in the RA group was significant (WMD = -2.88; 95% CI: -4.13 to -1.63; P < 0.00001). The difference in the VAS, JOA, SRS-22, Cobb angle and Cobb angle correction rate, SVA, and complications between the two groups was not statistically significant. The robot-assisted technique achieved statistically significant results in terms of pedicle screw placement time, blood loss, number of fluoroscopies, accuracy of pedicle screw position, and postoperative hospital stay.

Learning curves for robotic-assisted spine surgery: an analysis of the time taken for screw insertion, robot setting, registration, and fluoroscopy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to clarify the learning curve for robotic-assisted spine surgery. We analyzed the workflow in robotic-assisted spine surgery and investigated how much experience is required to become proficient in robotic-assisted spine surgery.

METHODS

The data were obtained from consecutive 125 patients who underwent robotic-assisted screw placement soon after introducing a spine robotic system at a single center from April 2021 to January 2023. The 125 cases were divided into phases 1-5 of sequential groups of 25 cases each and compared for screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, intraoperative blood loss, number of fused segments, operation time, or operation time per segment between the 5 phases. There were significant differences in screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time between the 5 phases. The screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time in phase 1 were significantly longer than those in phases 2, 3, 4, and 5.

CONCLUSION

In an analysis of 125 cases after the introduction of the spine robotic system, the screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the 25 cases in the period initially after introduction. The times were not significantly different in the subsequent 100 cases. Surgeons can be proficient in robotic-assisted spine surgery after their experience with 25 cases.

Comparison of Radiographic and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Surgery in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Between Robotics and Navigation: An Analysis Using Propensity Score Matching

Purpose This study aimed to compare the radiographic and patient-reported outcomes after surgery in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) between robotics and navigation using propensity score matching. Methods This retrospective study involved 50 patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion for AIS between October 2016 and August 2022, utilizing navigation or robotic systems, analyzing them using propensity score matching. The evaluations included assessments using X-ray, Scoliosis Research Society 22-Item (SRS-22) Questionnaire, and CT, considering variables such as age, gender, BMI, and Lenke type. Results Post matching, 13 cases each from robotics and navigation groups were compared. No significant differences were found in the demographic variables, preoperative X-ray parameters, and preoperative SRS-22 scores between the two groups. The robotics group demonstrated a higher perfect accuracy rate (94.0% vs. 84.7%, p=0.005) and a lower deviation rate in pedicle screw placements (1.6% vs. 4.1%, p=0.223). At one year postoperatively, there were no significant differences in the X-ray parameters between both groups. Likewise, no significant differences were found in each domain of SRS-22, but function, self-image, mental health, and satisfaction scores were numerically higher in the robotics group. Conclusion The application of a spinal robotic system in AIS surgery presented enhanced screw accuracy and lower deviation rates, compared to navigation, with no significant differences observed in the X-ray parameters and each domain of SRS-22 at one year postoperatively. This suggests that, to improve patient quality of life (QOL), it is essential for robotic-assisted spine surgery to focus not only on screw accuracy but also on the development of novel robotic-assisted techniques.

Accuracy and Safety of Pedicle Screw Placement for Treating Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Narrative Review Comparing Available Techniques

Posterior spinal fusion and segmental spinal instrumentation using pedicle screws (PS) is the most used procedure to correct adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Computed navigation, robotic navigation, and patient-specific drill templates are available, besides the first described free-hand technique. None of these techniques are recognized as the gold standard. This review compares the PS placement accuracy and misplacement-related complication rates achieved with the techniques mentioned above. It further reports PS accuracy classifications and anatomic PS misplacement risk factors. The literature suggests a higher PS placement accuracy for robotic relative to computed navigation and for the latter relative to the free-hand technique (misplacement rates: 0.4-7.2% versus 1.9-11% versus 1.5-50.7%) using variable accuracy classifications. The reported PS-misplacement-related complication rates are, however, uniformly low (0-1.4%) for every technique, while robotic and computed navigation induce a roughly fourfold increase in the patient's intraoperative radiation exposure relative to the free-hand technique with fluoroscopic implant positioning control. The authors, therefore, recommend dedicating robotic and computed navigation for complex deformities or revisions with altered landmarks, underline the need for a generally accepted PS accuracy classification, and advise against PS placement in grade 4 pedicles yielding higher misplacement rates (22.2-31.5%).

The Child's Age and the Size of the Curvature Do Not Affect the Accuracy of Screw Placement with the Free-Hand Technique in Spinal Deformities in Children and Adolescents

BACKGROUND

The current method of treatment of spinal deformities would be almost impossible without pedicle screws (PS) placement. There are only a few studies evaluating the safety of PS placement and possible complications in children during growth. The present study was carried out to evaluate the safety and accuracy of PS placement in children with spinal deformities at any age using postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans.

METHODS

318 patients (34 males and 284 females) who underwent 6358 PS fixations for pediatric spinal deformities were enrolled in this multi-center study. The patients were divided into three age groups: less than 10 years old, 11-13 years old, and 14-18 years old. These patients underwent postoperative CT scans and were analyzed for pedicle screw malposition (anterior, superior, inferior, medial, and lateral breaches).

RESULTS

The breach rate was 5.92% for all pedicles. There were 1.47% lateral and 3.12% medial breaches for all pedicles with tapping canals, and 2.66% lateral and 3.84% medial breaches for all pedicles without a tapping canal for the screw. Of the 6358 screws placed in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine, 98% of the screws were accurately placed (grade 0, 1, and juxta pedicular). A total of 56 screws (0.88%) breached more than 4 mm (grade 3), and 17 (0.26%) screws were replaced. No new and permanent neurological, vascular, or visceral complications were encountered.

CONCLUSIONS

The free-hand technique for pedicle screw placement in the acceptable and safety zone in pedicles and vertebral bodies was 98%. No complications associated with screw insertion in growth were noted. The free-hand technique for pedicle screw placement can be safely used in patients at any age. The screw accuracy does not depend on the child's age nor the size of the deformity curve. Segmental instrumentation with posterior fixation in children with spinal deformities can be performed with a very low complication rate. Navigation of the robot is only an auxiliary tool in the hands of the surgeons, and the result of the work ultimately depends on the surgeons.