Impact of robot-assisted spine surgery on health care quality and neurosurgical economics: A systemic review

Closing the Gap: The Incidence of Complications in Minimally Invasive Tubular, Endoscopic, and Robotic-Assisted Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedures

BACKGROUND

The aim of the current study was to compare the incidence of postoperative complications among minimally invasive surgery (MIS) tubular, endoscopic, and robot-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) techniques.

METHODS

We studied consecutive patients who underwent single-level or multilevel TLIF between 2020 and 2022. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (Visual Analog Scale leg score and Oswestry Disability Index), demographic, and intraoperative variables were recorded. One-way analysis of variance with Bartlett's equal-variance and Pearson chi-squared tests were used.

RESULTS

The study included 170 TLIF patients: 107 (63%) tubular, 42 (25%) endoscopic, and 21 (12%) robot assisted. All 3 TLIF techniques had similar complication rates: tubular 6 (5.6%), endoscopic 2 (4.8%), and robot assisted 1 (4.8%) all occurring within the first 2 weeks. Tubular TLIF reported the lowest incidence of new-onset neurologic symptoms, primarily radiculitis or numbness/tingling, at 2 weeks postoperatively (P < 0.05) with 21 (20%) tubular, 17 (41%) endoscopic, and 9 (43%) robot-assisted patients. There were 2 revisions in the robot-assisted group, while tubular and endoscopic each had one within 1 year. There was no statistical difference in preoperative or postoperative patient-reported outcomes between the TLIF groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study demonstrated that tubular, endoscopic, and robot-assisted TLIF procedures had similar complication rates. The tubular MIS TLIF reported fewer new neurologic symptoms compared with endoscopic and robot-assisted TLIF procedures at 2 weeks postoperative, with all groups declining in symptom persistency at later time intervals. Average Visual Analog Scale scores continuously improved up to 1 year postoperatively among all groups.

Feasibility and safety report on robotic assistance for cervical pedicle screw fixation: a cadaveric study

This cadaveric study aimed to evaluate the safety and usability of a novel robotic system for posterior cervical pedicle screw fixation. Three human cadaveric specimens and C2-T3 were included. Freshly frozen human cadaver specimens were prepared and subjected to robot-assisted posterior cervical pedicle screw fixation using the robotic system. The accuracy of screw placement, breach rate, and critical structure violations were evaluated. The results were statistically compared with those of previous studies that used different robotic systems for cervical pedicle screw fixation. The robotic system demonstrated a high accuracy rate in screw placement. A significant number of screws were placed within predetermined safe zones. The total entry offset was 1.08 ± 0.83 mm, the target offset was 1.86 ± 0.50 mm, and the angle offset was 2.14 ± 0.77°. Accuracy rates comparable with those of previous studies using different robotic systems were achieved. The system was also feasible, allowing precise navigation and real-time feedback during the procedure. This cadaveric study validated the safety and usability of the novel robotic system for posterior cervical pedicle screw fixation. The system exhibited high precision in screw placement, and the results support the extension of the indications for robot-assisted pedicle screw fixation from the lumbar spine to the cervical spine.

Comparison of No Tap (two-step) and tapping robotic assisted cortical bone trajectory screw insertion

Workflow for cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws includes tapping line-to-line or under tapping by 1 mm. We describe a non-tapping, two-step workflow for CBT screw placement, and compare the safety profile and time savings to the Tap (three-step) workflow. Patients undergoing robotic assisted 1-3 level posterior fusion with CBT screws for degenerative conditions were identified and separated into either a No-Tap or Tap workflow. Number of total screws, screw-related complications, estimated blood loss, operative time, robotic time, and return to the operating room were collected and analyzed. There were 91 cases (458 screws) in the No-Tap and 88 cases (466 screws) in the Tap groups, with no difference in demographics, revision status, ASA grade, approach, number of levels fused or diagnosis between cohorts. Total robotic time was lower in the No-Tap (26.7 min) versus the Tap group (30.3 min, p = 0.053). There was no difference in the number of malpositioned screws identified intraoperatively (10 vs 6, p = 0.427), screws converted to freehand (3 vs 3, p = 0.699), or screws abandoned (3 vs 2, p = 1.000). No pedicle/pars fracture or fixation failure was seen in the No-Tap cohort and one in the Tap cohort (p = 1.00). No patients in either cohort were returned to OR for malpositioned screws. This study showed that the No-Tap screw insertion workflow for robot-assisted CBT reduces robotic time without increasing complications.

Learning Curve in Robotic Stereoelectroencephalography: Single Platform Experience

BACKGROUND

Learning curve, training, and cost impede widespread implementation of new technology. Neurosurgical robotic technology introduces challenges to visuospatial reasoning and requires the acquisition of new fine motor skills. Studies detailing operative workflow, learning curve, and patient outcomes are needed to describe the utility and cost-effectiveness of new robotic technology.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of pediatric patients who underwent robotic stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) with the Medtronic Stealth Autoguide. Workflow, total operative time, and time per electrode were evaluated alongside target accuracy assessed via error measurements and root sum square. Patient demographics and clinical outcomes related to sEEG were also assessed.

RESULTS

Robot-assisted sEEG was performed in 12 pediatric patients. Comparison of cases over time demonstrated a mean operative time of 363.3 ± 109.5 minutes for the first 6 cases and 256.3 ± 59.1 minutes for the second 6 cases, with reduced operative time per electrode (P = 0.037). Mean entry point error, target point error, and depth point error were 1.82 ± 0.77 mm, 2.26 ± 0.71 mm, and 1.27 ± 0.53 mm, respectively, with mean root sum square of 3.23 ± 0.97 mm. Error measurements between magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography angiography found computed tomography angiography to be more accurate with significant differences in mean entry point error (P = 0.043) and mean target point error (P = 0.035). The epileptogenic zone was identified in 11 patients, with therapeutic surgeries following in 9 patients, of whom 78% achieved an Engel class I.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated institutional workflow evolution and learning curve for the Autoguide in pediatric sEEG, resulting in reduced operative times and increased accuracy over a small number of cases. The platform may seamlessly and quickly be incorporated into clinical practice, and the provided workflow can facilitate a smooth transition.

Surgical Characteristics of Intracranial Biopsy Using a Frameless Stereotactic Robotic Platform: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cranial robotics are a burgeoning field of neurosurgery. To date, all cranial robotic systems described have been computerized, arm-based instruments that take up significant space in the operating room. The Medtronic Stealth Autoguide robot has a smaller operating room footprint and offers multiaxial, frame-based surgical targeting. The authors set out to define the surgical characteristics of a novel robotic platform for brain biopsy in a large patient cohort.

METHODS

Patients who underwent stereotactic biopsy using the Stealth Autoguide cranial robotic platform from July 2020 to March 2023 were included in this study. Clinical, surgical, and histological data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six consecutive patients (50 female, 46 male) were included. The mean age at biopsy was 53.7 ± 18.0 years. The mean target depth was 68.2 ± 15.3 mm. The biopsy diagnostic tissue acquisition rate was 100%. The mean time from incision to biopsy tissue acquisition was 15.4 ± 9.9 minutes. Target lesions were located throughout the brain: in the frontal lobe (n = 32, 33.3%), parietal lobe (n = 21, 21.9%), temporal lobe (n = 22, 22.9%), deep brain nuclei/thalamus (n = 13, 13.5%), cerebellum (n = 7, 7.3%), and brainstem (n = 1, 1.0%). Most cases were gliomas (n = 75, 78.2%). Patients were discharged home on postoperative day 0 or 1 in 62.5% of cases. A total of 7 patients developed postoperative complications (7.2%).

CONCLUSION

This cranial robotic platform can be used for efficient, safe, and accurate cranial biopsies that allow for reliable diagnosis of intracranial pathology in a minimally invasive setting.

Is There a Difference in Screw Accuracy, Robot Time Per Screw, Robot Abandonment, and Radiation Exposure Between the Mazor X and the Renaissance? A Propensity-Matched Analysis of 1179 Robot-Assisted Screws

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective single-cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcomes/complications of 2 robotic systems for spine surgery.

METHODS

Adult patients (≥18-years-old) who underwent robot-assisted spine surgery from 2016-2019 were assessed. A propensity score matching (PSM) algorithm was used to match Mazor X to Renaissance cases. Preoperative CT scan for planning and an intraoperative O-arm for screw evaluation were preformed. Outcomes included screw accuracy, robot time/screw, robot abandonment, and radiation. Screw accuracy was measured using Vitrea Core software by 2 orthopedic surgeons. Screw breach was measured according to the Gertzbein/Robbins classification.

RESULTS

After PSA, a total of 65 patients (Renaissance: 22 vs. X: 43) were included. Patient/operative factors were similar between robot systems (P > .05). The pedicle screw accuracy was similar between robots (Renaissance: 1.1%% vs. X: 1.3%, P = .786); however, the S2AI screw breach rate was significantly lower for the X (Renaissance: 9.5% vs. X: 1.2%, P = .025). Robot time per screw was not statistically different (Renaissance: 4.6 minutes vs. X: 3.9 minutes, P = .246). The X was more reliable with an abandonment rate of 2.3% vs. Renaissance:22.7%, P = .007. Radiation exposure were not different between robot systems. Non-robot related complications including dural tear, loss of motor/sensory function, and blood transfusion were similar between robot systems.

CONCLUSION

This is the first comparative analyses of screw accuracy, robot time/screw, robot abandonment, and radiation exposure between the Mazor X and Renaissance systems. There are substantial improvements in the X robot, particularly in the perioperative planning processes, which likely contribute to the X's superiority in S2AI screw accuracy by nearly 8-fold and robot reliability by nearly 10-fold.

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 vs. manually guided stereoelectroencephalography for refractory epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Robotic assistance has improved electrode implantation precision in stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) for refractory epilepsy patients. We sought to assess the relative safety of the robotic-assisted (RA) procedure compared to the traditional hand-guided one. A systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane was performed for studies directly comparing robot-assisted vs. manually guided SEEG to treat refractory epilepsy. The primary outcomes included target point error (TPE), entry point error (EPE), time of implantation of each electrode, operative time, postoperative intracranial hemorrhage, infection, and neurologic deficit. We included 427 patients from 11 studies, of whom 232 (54.3%) underwent robot-assisted surgery and 196 (45.7%) underwent manually guided surgery. The primary endpoint, TPE, was not statistically significant (MD 0.04 mm; 95% CI - 0.21, - 0.29; p = 0.76). Nonetheless, EPE was significantly lower in the intervention group (MD - 0.57 mm; 95% CI - 1.08; - 0.06; p = 0.03). Total operative time was significantly lower in the RA group (MD - 23.66 min; 95% CI - 32.01, - 15.31; p < 0.00001), as well as the individual time of implantation of each electrode (MD - 3.35 min; 95% CI - 3.68, - 3.03; p < 0.00001). Postoperative intracranial hemorrhage did not differ between groups: robotic (9/145; 6.2%) vs. manual (8/139; 5.7%) (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.40-2.34; p = 0.94). There was no statistically relevant difference in infection (p = 0.4) and postoperative neurological deficit (p = 0.47) incidence between the two groups. In this analysis, there is a potential relevance in the RA procedure when comparing the traditional one, since operative time, time of implantation of each electrode, and EPE were significantly lower in the robotic group. More research is needed to corroborate the superiority of this novel technique.

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.

Technological Advances in Spine Surgery: Navigation, Robotics, and Augmented Reality

Accurate screw placement is critical to avoid vascular or neurologic complications during spine surgery and to maximize fixation for fusion and deformity correction. Computer-assisted navigation, robotic-guided spine surgery, and augmented reality surgical navigation are currently available technologies that have been developed to improve screw placement accuracy. The advent of multiple generations of new technologies within the past 3 decades has presented surgeons with a diverse array of choices when it comes to pedicle screw placement. Considerations for patient safety and optimal outcomes must be paramount when selecting a technology.

Robotic and navigated pedicle screws are safer and more accurate than fluoroscopic freehand screws: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Navigated and robotic pedicle screw placement systems have been developed to improve the accuracy of screw placement. However, the literature comparing the safety and accuracy of robotic and navigated screw placement with fluoroscopic freehand screw placement in thoracolumbar spine surgery has been limited.

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials that compared the accuracy and safety profiles of robotic and navigated pedicle screws with fluoroscopic freehand pedicle screws.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Systematic review and meta-analysis PATIENT SAMPLE: Only randomized controlled trials comparing robotic-assisted or navigated pedicle screws placement with freehand pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Odds ratio (OR) estimates for screw accuracy according to the Gertzbein-Robbins scale and relative risk (RR) for various surgical complications.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for English-language studies from inception through April 7, 2022, including references of eligible articles. The search was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Two reviewers conducted a full abstraction of all data, and one reviewer verified accuracy. Information was extracted on study design, quality, bias, participants, and risk estimates. Data and estimates were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method for random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 14 papers encompassing 12 randomized controlled trials were identified (n=892 patients, 4,046 screws). The pooled analysis demonstrated that robotic and navigated pedicle screw placement techniques were associated with higher odds of screw accuracy (OR 2.66, 95% CI 1.24-5.72, p=.01). Robotic and navigated screw placement was associated with a lower risk of facet joint violations (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.38, p<.01) and major complications (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.84, p=.02). There were no observed differences between groups in nerve root injury (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.11-2.30, p=.37), or return to operating room for screw revision (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.07-1.13, p=.07).

CONCLUSIONS

These estimates suggest that robotic and navigated screw placement techniques are associated with higher odds of screw accuracy and superior safety profile compared with fluoroscopic freehand techniques. Additional randomized controlled trials will be needed to further validate these findings.

Robotics in spine surgery: systematic review of literature

PURPOSE

Over 4.83 million spine surgery procedures are performed annually around the world. With the considerable caseload and the precision needed to achieve optimal spinal instrumentation, technical progress has helped to improve the technique's safety and accuracy with the development of peri-operative assistance tools. Contrary to other surgical applications already part of the standard of care, the development of robotics in spine surgery is still a novelty and is not widely available nor used. Robotics, especially when coupled with other guidance modalities such as navigation, seems to be a promising tool in our quest for accuracy, improving patient outcomes and reducing surgical complications. Robotics in spine surgery may also be for the surgeon a way to progress in terms of ergonomics, but also to respond to a growing concern among surgical teams to reduce radiation exposure.

METHOD

We present in this recent systematic review of the literature realized according to the PRISMA guidelines the place of robotics in spine surgery, reviewing the comparison to standard techniques, the current and future indications, the learning curve, the impact on radiation exposure, and the cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Seventy-six relevant original studies were identified and analyzed for the review.

CONCLUSION

Robotics has proved to be a safe help for spine surgery, both for the patient with a decrease of operating time and increase in pedicular screw accuracy, and for the surgical team with a decrease of radiation exposure. Medico-economic studies demonstrated that despite a high buying cost, the purchase of a robot dedicated for spine surgery is cost-effective resulting in lesser revision, lower infection, reduced length of stay, and shorter surgical procedure.

Index Surgery Cost of Fluoroscopic Freehand Versus Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement in Lumbar Instrumentation: An Age, Sex, and Approach-Matched Cohort Comparison

BACKGROUND

Spine surgery costs are notoriously high, and there are already criticisms and concerns over the economic effects. There is no consensus on cost variation with robot-assisted spine fusion (rLF) compared with a manual fluoroscopic freehand (fLF) approach. This study looks to compare the early costs between the robotic method and the freehand method in lumbar spine fusion.

METHODS

rLFs by one spine surgeon were age, sex, and approach-matched to fLF procedures by another spine surgeon. Variable direct costs, readmissions, and revision surgeries within 90 days were reviewed and compared.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine rLFs were matched to 39 fLF procedures. No significant differences were observed in clinical outcomes. rLF had higher total encounter costs (P < 0.001) and day-of-surgery costs (P = 0.005). Increased costs were mostly because of increased supply cost (0.0183) and operating room time cost (P < 0.001). Linear regression showed a positive relationship with operating room time and cost in rLF (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

rLF is associated with a higher index surgery cost. The main factor driving increased cost is supply costs, with other variables too small in difference to make a notable financial effect. rLF will become more common, and other institutions may need to take a closer financial look at this more novel instrumentation before adoption.

Development of a Robotic Spine Surgery Program: Rationale, Strategy, Challenges, and Monitoring of Outcomes After Implementation

Surgical robots were invented in the 1980s, and since then, robotic-assisted surgery has become commonplace. In the field of spine surgery, robotic assistance is utilized mainly to place pedicle screws, and multiple studies have demonstrated that robots can increase the accuracy of screw placement and reduce radiation exposure to the patient and the surgeon. However, this may be at the cost of longer operative times, complications, and the risk of errors in mapping the patient's anatomy.

Da Vinci robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal debridement for lumbar septic spondylodiscitis: A two-case report

The anterior approach is one of the widely used surgical treatments for lumbar spondylodiscitis, but it has the disadvantages of large trauma and a high incidence of complications. Our experiences suggested that the laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach could be effective to overcome those disadvantages of the anterior approach. Herein, we report two cases of successfully treated lumbar pyogenic spondylodiscitis using a robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach. The technique utilizes a robot that allows a laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach while offering excellent high-definition images of three-dimensional vision. After the operation, both patients achieved good formation and fusion of the vertebrae. Preliminary evidence suggests that the robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach may be feasible for the treatment of lumbar spondylodiscitis.

Beyond Placement of Pedicle Screws - New Applications for Robotics in Spine Surgery: A Multi-Surgeon, Single-Institution Experience

Interest in robotic-assisted spine surgery has grown as surgeon comfort and technology has evolved to maximize benefits of time saving and precision. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has currently only approved robotics to assist in determining the ideal trajectory for pedicle screw placement after extensive research supporting its efficacy and efficiency. To be considered a durable and effective option, robotics need to expand beyond the indication of just placing pedicle screws. This article aims to illustrate a multi-surgeon, single-institution experience with unique applications of robotic technologies in spine surgery. We will explore accessing Kambin's Triangle in percutaneous transforaminal interbody fusion (percLIF), iliac fixation in metastatic cancer, and sacroiliac (SI) fusions. Each of these topics will be covered in depth with associated background information and subsequent discussion. We show that with proper understanding of its limitations, robots can help surgeons perform difficult surgeries in a safe manner.

The Impact of Computer-Assisted Navigation on Charges and Readmission in Lumbar Spinal Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective National Database Study.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost and patient outcomes associated with the utilization of computer-assisted navigation (CAN) utilization on patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.

BACKGROUND

CAN systems have demonstrated comparable outcomes with instrumentation and procedural speed when compared with traditional techniques. In recent years, CAN systems have seen increased adoption in spinal surgery as they allow for better contextualization of anatomical structures with the goal of improving surgical accuracy and reproducibility.

METHODS

The 2016 National Readmission Database was queried for patients with lumbar spinal fusion ICD-10 codes, with 2 subgroups created based on computer-aided navigation ICD-10 codes. Nonelective cases and patients below 18 years of age were excluded. Univariate analysis on demographics, surgical data, and total charges was performed. Postoperative complication rates were calculated based on diagnosis. Lastly, multivariate analysis was performed to assess navigation's impact on cost and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 88,445 lumbar fusion surgery patients were identified. Of the total, 2478 (2.8%) patients underwent lumbar fusion with navigation utilization, while 85,967 (97.2%) patients underwent surgery without navigation. The average total charges were $150,947 ($150,058, $151,836) and $161,018 ($155,747, $166,289) for the non-CAN and CAN groups, respectively ( P <0.001). The 30-day readmission rates were 5.3% for the non-CAN cohort and 3.1% for the CAN cohort ( P <0.05). The 90-day readmission rates were 8.8% for the non-CAN cohort and 5.2% for the CAN cohort ( P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CAN use was found to be significantly associated with increased cost and decreased 30-day and 90-day readmissions. Although patients operated on with CAN had increased routine discharge and decreased readmission risk, future studies must continue to evaluate the cost-benefit of CAN. Limitations include ICD-10 codes for CAN utilization being specific to region of surgery, not to exact type.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

The Impact of Computer-Assisted Navigation on Charges and Readmission in Patients Undergoing Posterior Cervical Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of 2016 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD).

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate cost and outcomes associated with navigation use on posterior cervical fusion (PCF) surgery patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Computer-assisted navigation systems demonstrate comparable outcomes with hardware placement and procedural speed compared with traditional techniques. Innovations in technology continue to improve surgeons' performance in complicated procedures, causing need to analyze the impact on patient care.

METHODS

The 2016 NRD was queried for patients with PCF surgery ICD-10 codes. Cost and readmission rates were compared with and without navigation. Nonelective cases and patients below 18 years of age were excluded. Univariate analysis on demographics, surgical data, and total charges was performed. Lastly, multivariate analysis was performed to assess navigation's impact on cost and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 11,834 patients were identified, with 137 (1.2%) patients undergoing surgery with navigation and 11,697 (98.8%) patients without. Average total charge was $131,939.47 and $141,270.1 for the non-navigation and navigation cohorts, respectively ( P =0.349). Thirty-day and 90-day readmission rates were not significantly lower in patients who received navigation versus those that did not ( P =0.087). This remained insignificant after adjusting for several variables, age above 65, sex, medicare status, mental health history, and comorbidities. The model adjusting for demographic and comorbidities maintained insignificant results of navigation being associated with decreased 30-day and 90-day readmissions ( P =0.079).

CONCLUSIONS

Navigation use in PCF surgery was not associated with increased cost, and patients operated on with navigation did not significantly have increased routine discharge or decreased 90-day readmission. As a result, future studies must continue to evaluate the cost-benefit of navigation use for cervical fusion surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: An Overview

Spinal surgery is undergoing a major transformation toward a minimally invasive paradigm. This shift is being driven by multiple factors, including the need to address spinal problems in an older and sicker population, as well as changes in patient preferences and reimbursement patterns. Increasingly, minimally invasive surgical techniques are being used in place of traditional open approaches due to significant advancements and implementation of intraoperative imaging and navigation technologies. However, in some patients, due to specific anatomic or pathologic factors, minimally invasive techniques are not always possible. Numerous algorithms have been described, and additional efforts are underway to better optimize patient selection for minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) procedures in order to achieve optimal outcomes. Numerous unique MISS approaches and techniques have been described, and several have become fundamental. Investigators are evaluating combinations of MISS techniques to further enhance the surgical workflow, patient safety, and efficiency.

Understanding the surgeon's behaviour during robot-assisted surgery: protocol for the qualitative Behav'Robot study

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted surgery is spreading worldwide, accounting for more than 1.2 million procedures in 2019. Data are sparse in the literature regarding the surgeon's mechanisms that mediate risk-taking during a procedure, especially robot-assisted. This study aims to describe and understand the behaviour of the surgeons during robot-assisted surgery and the change in their behaviour with increasing experience in using the robot.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with surgeons who perform robot-assisted surgery. An interview guide comprising open questions will be used to ensure that the points to be discussed are systematically addressed during each interview (ie, (1) difference in behaviour and preparation of the surgeon between a standard procedure and a robot-assisted procedure; (2) the influence of proprioceptive modifications, gain in stability and cognitive biases, inherent in the use of a surgical robot and (3) the intrinsic effect of the learning curve on the behaviour of the surgeons. After transcription, interviews will be analysed with the help of NVivo software, using thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Since this project examines professional practices in the field of social and human sciences, ethics committee was not required in accordance with current French legislation (Decree no 2017-884, 9 May 2017). Consent from the surgeons is implied by the fact that the interviews are voluntary. Surgeons will nonetheless be informed that they are free to interrupt the interview at any time.Results will be presented in peer-reviewed national and international congresses and submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication. The communication and publication of the results will be placed under the responsibility of the principal investigator and publications will be prepared in compliance with the ICMJE uniform requirements for manuscripts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04869995.

Bone-Mounted Robotic System in Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery for Osteoporosis Patients: Clinical and Radiological Outcomes

Purpose

Severe complications, including screw loosening events and low fusion rates, in spinal fusion surgery using the traditional open method are problematic. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the rate of screw loosening and the clinical outcomes of bone-mounted miniature robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in patients treated for degenerative spinal disease.

Patients and Methods

Data were collected from the medical records of 118 patients (mean age, 69 years). Differences in clinical outcomes, including the Oswestry disability index, visual analog scale score, screw loosening rate, cage fusion rate, and complications, were evaluated among different bone mineral densities.

Results

The screw loosening and cage fusion rates for all patients, normal bone mineral density, osteopenia, and osteoporosis groups were 12%, 8.6%, 13.1%, and 14%, respectively, and 85.3%, 93%, 82.5%, and 81.4%, respectively. There was a higher screw loosening rate and a lower cage fusion rate in the osteopenia and osteoporosis groups than in the normal bone density group. The accuracy of the screw placement was 97.3%. There were no statistically significant differences in the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale scores, and no major complications for dural tear or vascular or visceral injury.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated an acceptable screw loosening rate in patients with osteoporosis compared to that in patients with normal bone mineral density. The robotic system resulted in accurate screw placement in patients with osteoporosis.

A multicenter study of the 5-year trends in robot-assisted spine surgery outcomes and complications

BACKGROUND

Although a growing amount of literature that suggests robots are safe and can achieve comparable outcomes to conventional techniques, much of this literature is limited by small sample sizes and single-surgeon or single center series. Furthermore, it is unclear what the impact of robotic technology has made on operative and clinical outcomes over time. This is the first and largest multicenter study to examine the trends in outcomes and complications after robot-assisted spine surgery over a 5-year period.

METHODS

Adult (≥18 years old) patients who underwent spine surgery with robot-assistance between 2015 and 2019 at four unique spine centers. The robotic systems used included the Mazor Renaissance, Mazor X, and Mazor Stealth Edition. Patients with incomplete data were excluded from this study. The minimum follow-up was 90 days.

RESULTS

A total of 722 adult patients were included (117 Renaissance, 477 X, 128 Stealth). Most patient and operative factors (e.g., sex, tobacco status, total instrumented levels, and pelvic fixation,) were similar across the years. Mean ± standard deviation Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was 1.5±1.5. The most commonly reported diagnoses included high grade spondylolisthesis (40.6%), degenerative disc disease (18.4%), and degenerative scoliosis (17.6%). Mean (standard deviation) number of instrumented levels was 3.8±3.4. From 2015 to 2019, average robot time per screw improved from 7.2 to 5.5 minutes (P=0.004, R²=0.649). Average fluoroscopy time per screw improved from 15.2 to 9.4 seconds (P=0.002). Rates of both intraoperative screw exchange for misplaced screw (2015-2016: 2.7%, 2019: 0.8%, P=0.0115, R²=0.1316) and robot abandonment (2015-2016: 7.1%, 2019: 1.1%, P=0.011, R²=0.215) improved significantly over time. The incidence of other intraoperative complications (e.g., dural tear, loss of motor/sensory function, blood transfusion) remained consistently low, but similar throughout the years. The length of stay (LOS) decreased by nearly 1 day from 2015 to 2019 (P=0.007, R²=0.779). 90-day reoperation rates did not change significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

At four institutions among seven surgeons, we demonstrate robot screw accuracy, reliability, operative efficiency, and radiation exposure improved significantly from 2015 to 2019. 90-day complication rates remained low and LOS decreased significantly with time. These findings further validate continued usage of robot-assisted spine surgery and the path toward improved value-based care.

Robotic-Assisted Lumbar Fusion: An Effective Technique for Pedicle Screw Placement

Degenerative lumbar disease is a common condition in which progressive deterioration of the structures in the spine causes severely incapacitating pain and disability. Conservative management, including passive or active physical therapy, activity modification, and medications (eg, anti-inflammatory medications, oral and injectable steroids, opioids), may provide relief. However, when conservative management is unsuccessful or patients experience symptoms for an extended period of time, they may require spine surgery. Surgeons use a variety of techniques to perform lumbar fusion procedures with instrumentation, including open, percutaneous, minimally invasive, and robotic-assisted with navigation. The accuracy of pedicle-screw placement varies according to the technique used, and accuracy rates are high after robotic-assisted with navigation procedures. In addition, robotic-assisted spine procedures result in fewer infections than non-robotic-assisted spine procedures (P = .04). Perioperative nurses should understand basic lumbar spine anatomy, steps completed during robotic-assisted lumbar spine surgery, and the nursing considerations for patients undergoing this type of procedure.

Operator independent reliability of direct augmented reality navigated pedicle screw placement and rod bending

Background

AR based navigation of spine surgeries may not only provide accurate surgical execution but also operator independency by compensating for potential skill deficits. “Direct” AR-navigation, namely superposing trajectories on anatomy directly, have not been investigated regarding their accuracy and operator's dependence.

Purpose of this study was to prove operator independent reliability and accuracy of both AR assisted pedicle screw navigation and AR assisted rod bending in a cadaver setting.

Methods

Two experienced spine surgeons and two biomedical engineers (laymen) performed independently from each other pedicle screw instrumentations from L1-L5 in a total of eight lumbar cadaver specimens (20 screws/operator) using a fluoroscopy-free AR based navigation method. Screw fitting rods from L1 to S2-Ala-Ileum were bent bilaterally using an AR based rod bending navigation method (4 rods/operator). Outcome measures were pedicle perforations, accuracy compared to preoperative plan, registration time, navigation time, total rod bending time and operator's satisfaction for these procedures.

Results

97.5% of all screws were safely placed (<2 mm perforation), overall mean deviation from planned trajectory was 6.8±3.9°, deviation from planned entry point was 4±2.7 mm, registration time per vertebra was 2:25 min (00:56 to 10:00 min), navigation time per screw was 1:07 min (00:15 to 12:43 min) rod bending time per rod was 4:22 min (02:07 to 10:39 min), operator's satisfaction with AR based screw and rod navigation was 5.38±0.67 (1 to 6, 6 being the best rate). Comparison of surgeons and laymen revealed significant difference in navigation time (1:01 min; 00:15 to 3:00 min vs. 01:37 min; 00:23 to 12:43 min; p = 0.004, respectively) but not in pedicle perforation rate.

Conclusions

Direct AR based screw and rod navigation using a surface digitization registration technique is reliable and independent of surgical experience. The accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in the lumbar spine is comparable with the current standard techniques.

A tale of two robots: Operating times and learning curves in robot-assisted lumbar fusion

Robotic assistance technologies are being incorporated into minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) to minimize radiation exposure to the patient and operating staff. However, they introduce new issues including increased operating time and difficult incorporation into surgical workflow. This study, conducted with 42 patients under the care of one neurosurgeon in Sydney, Australia, investigates the operating time increase with three different robotic modalities, and the learning curves they pose to the surgeon. Between the comparable modalities of freehand MIS-TLIF and Mazor Renaissance® CT to Fluoro, there was a significant increase in time from patient draping to insertion of the final K-wire (p = 0.0019), and a non-significant increase in time per K-wire (p = 0.55) using Mazor Renaissance®. Comparing the ROSA® and Mazor Renaissance® Scan and Plan, there were significant increases in drape to final K-wire time and time per K-wire using ROSA® assistance (p = 0.000068 and p = 0.011). ROSA® also had a steeper learning curve compared to both Mazor Renaissance® modalities, which were similar. Our study shows that Mazor Renaissance® modalities are superior to ROSA® in minimizing extra operating time, and also have easier learning curves; however, both modalities increase operating time compared with freehand MIS-TLIF. This study, to our knowledge, is the first to compare multiple robotic techniques in MIS-TLIF. Though these results highlight important differences between robotic modalities that are crucial for spinal surgeons to understand, the low sample size and variability in data reveal the need for larger, multi-centre studies in this field.

Initial Intraoperative Experience with Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement with Cirq® Robotic Alignment: An Evaluation of the First 70 Screws

BACKGROUND

Robot-guided spine surgery is based on a preoperatively planned trajectory that is reproduced in the operating room by the robotic device. This study presents our initial experience with thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement using Brainlab's Cirq^® surgeon-controlled robotic arm (BrainLab, Munich, Germany).

METHODS

All patients who underwent robotic-assisted implantation of pedicle screws in the thoracolumbar spine were included in the study. Our workflow, consisting of preoperative imagining, screw planning, intraoperative imaging with automatic registration, fusion of the preoperative and intraoperative imaging with a review of the preplanned screw trajectories, robotic-assisted insertion of K-wires, followed by a fluoroscopy-assisted insertion of pedicle screws and control iCT scan, is described.

RESULTS

A total of 12 patients (5 male and 7 females, mean age 67.4 years) underwent 13 surgeries using the Cirq^® Robotic Alignment Module for thoracolumbar pedicle screw implantation. Spondylodiscitis, metastases, osteoporotic fracture, and spinal canal stenosis were detected. A total of 70 screws were implanted. The mean time per screw was 08:27 ± 06:54 min. The mean time per screw for the first 7 surgeries (first 36 screws) was 16:03 ± 09:32 min and for the latter 6 surgeries (34 screws) the mean time per screw was 04:35 ± 02:11 min (p < 0.05). Mean entry point deviation was 1.9 ± 1.23 mm, mean deviation from the tip of the screw was 2.61 ± 1.6 mm and mean angular deviation was 3.5° ± 2°. For screw-placement accuracy we used the CT-based Gertzbein and Robbins System (GRS). Of the total screws, 65 screws were GRS A screws (92.85%), one screw was a GRS B screw, and two further screws were grade C. Two screws were D screws (2.85%) and underwent intraoperative revision. There were no perioperative deficits.

CONCLUSION

Brainlab's Cirq^® Robotic Alignment surgeon-controlled robotic arm is a safe and beneficial method for accurate thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement with high accuracy.

Robotic navigation in spine surgery: Where are we now and where are we going?

Robotic navigation is a new and rapidly emerging niche within minimally invasive spine surgery. The robotic arms-race began in 2004 and has resulted in no less than four major robotic surgical adjuncts. Current Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved applications of robotic navigation are limited to pedicle screw instrumentation, but new indications and experimental applications are rapidly emerging. As with any new technology, robotic navigation must be vetted for clinical efficacy, efficiency, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Given the rapid advancements made on a yearly basis, it is important to make frequent and objective assessments of the available technology. Thus, the authors seek to provide the most up-to-date review of the history, currently available technology, learning curve, novel applications, and cost effectiveness of today's available robotic systems as it relates to spine surgery.

Complications and Revision Rates in Minimally Invasive Robotic-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic-Guided Spinal Fusions: The MIS ReFRESH Prospective Comparative Study

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter, partially randomized.

OBJECTIVE

Assess rates of complications, revision surgery, and radiation between Mazor robotic-guidance (RG) and fluoro-guidance (FG).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Minimally invasive surgery MIS ReFRESH is the first study designed to compare RG and FG techniques in adult minimally invasive surgery (MIS) lumbar fusions.

METHODS

Primary endpoints were analyzed at 1 year follow-up. Analysis of variables through Cox logistic regression and a Kaplan-Meier Survival Curve of surgical complications.

RESULTS

Nine sites enrolled 485 patients: 374 (RG arm) and 111 (FG arm). 93.2% of patients had more than 1 year f/u. There were no differences for sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, or tumor. Mean age of RG patients was 59.0 versus 62.5 for FG (P = 0.009) and body mass index (BMI) was 31.2 versus 28.1 (P< 0.001). Percentage of smokers was almost double in the RG (15.2% vs. 7.2%, P = 0.029). Surgical time was similar (skin-to-skin time/no. of screws) at 24.9 minutes RG and 22.9 FG (P = 0.550). Fluoroscopy during surgery/no. of screws was 15.5 seconds RG versus 35.4 seconds FG, (15 seconds average reduction). Fluoroscopy time during instrumentation/no. of screws was 3.6 seconds RG versus 17.8 seconds FG showing an 80% average reduction of fluoro time/screw in RG (P < 0.001). Within 1 year follow-up, there were 39 (10.4%) surgical complications RG versus 39 (35.1%) FG, and 8 (2.1%) revisions RG versus 7 (6.3%) FG. Cox regression analysis including age, sex, BMI, CCI, and no. of screws, demonstrated that the hazard ratio (HR) for complication was 5.8 times higher FG versus RG (95% CI: 3.5-9.6, P < 0.001). HR for revision surgery was 11.0 times higher FG versus RG cases (95% CI 2.9-41.2, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Mazor robotic-guidance was found to have a 5.8 times lower risk of a surgical complication and 11.0 times lower risk for revision surgery. Surgical time was similar between groups and robotic-guidance reduced fluoro time per screw by 80% (approximately 1 min/case).Level of Evidence: 2.

Feasibility and accuracy of orthopaedic surgical robot system for intraoperative navigation to locate bone tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The combination of navigational system and robotics has the potential to accurately identify and drill bone tunnels in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This study explores the feasibility and accuracy of bone tunnel positioning using the TiRobot, an orthopaedic surgical robot.

METHODS

The experiment was divided into two groups. In group A, the bone tunnels were positioned using the TiRobot surgical robot (n = 8). In group B, handheld locators were used for positioning (n = 8).

RESULTS

TiRobot can be used for positioning the ACL bone tunnel. The accuracy of positioning the femoral tunnel in group A and B was 1.00 ± 0.20 and 3.10 ± 0.59 mm, respectively (t = -9.49, P < 0.001). As for tibial tunnel, the accuracy was 1.02 ± 0.20 and 2.64 ± 0.14 mm, respectively (t = -18.54, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The bone tunnel drilling precision using TiRobot for ACL reconstruction surgery was more accurate than traditional surgical techniques.

The accuracy of robot-assisted S2 alar-iliac screw placement at two different healthcare centers

Background

Current literature on robot-assisted S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw placement shows favorable outcomes and screw accuracy; however, the data is limited by a few retrospective, single-surgeon studies. To the author's knowledge, this is the first multicenter study which evaluates the accuracy of robot-assisted S2AI screws.

Methods

Adult (≥18 years old) patients who underwent robot-assisted S2AI screw placement from 2017-2019 were reviewed. All surgeries used the same proprietary robotic guidance system, Mazor X (Mazor Robotics Ltd).

Results

A total of 65 screws were assessed in 31 patients. The mean follow-up ± standard deviation was 362±190 days (minimum was 90 days). The mean age was 61.1±11 years old, and 54.8% (n=17) of patients were female. Nearly half of the patients had a primary diagnosis of degenerative scoliosis (48.4%, n=15). Other diagnosis included pseudarthrosis (22.6%, n=7), degenerative disc disease (16.1%, n=5), and high-grade spondylolisthesis (12.9%, n=4). The mean length and diameter of screws were 84.6±6.1 mm and 8.4±0.7, respectively. The mean axial and sagittal angles were 50.0±6.3 and 24.0±10.5, respectively. The overall screw accuracy was 93.8% (n=61). There were four iliac cortex breaches (anterior =3, inferior 1) with a mean breach distance of 3.5±3.2. No statistically significant differences in screw length, diameter, axial angle, and sagittal angle were observed between screws with and without a breach. No intraoperative neurologic, vascular, or visceral complications from the S2AI screw were observed. No post-discharge wound complications, screw prominence issues, or revision of S2AI screws were observed during the study's follow-up period.

Conclusions

Robot-assisted S2AI screw placement was found to be safe and accurate in this multicenter study. This is largely attributed to the versatility of the robotic guidance software that allows for detailed and precise preoperative and intraoperative planning.

Spine Image Guidance and Robotics: Exposure, Education, Training, and the Learning Curve

The use of intraoperative robotics and imaging for spine surgery has been shown to be safe, efficacious, and beneficial to patients, offering accurate placement of instrumentation, decreased operative time and blood loss, and improved postoperative outcomes. Despite these proven benefits, it has yet to be uniformly adopted. One of the major barriers for universal adoption of intraoperative robotics is the learning curve for this complex technology, in conjunction with a lack of formalized training. These same obstacles for universal adoption were faced in the introduction of surgical technology in other disciplines, and the use of this technology has become the standard of care in some of those specialties. Part of the success and widespread implementation of prior novel technology was the introduction of formalized training systems, which are currently lacking in advanced spine surgical technology. Therefore, the future success of intraoperative robotics and imaging for spine surgery depends on the creation of a formalized training system. We detail the best techniques for surgical pedagogy, as well as propose a comprehensive curriculum.

Emerging Technologies in the Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity

Outcomes for adult spinal deformity continue to improve as new technologies become integrated into clinical practice. Machine learning, robot-guided spinal surgery, and patient-specific rods are tools that are being used to improve preoperative planning and patient satisfaction. Machine learning can be used to predict complications, readmissions, and generate postoperative radiographs which can be shown to patients to guide discussions about surgery. Robot-guided spinal surgery is a rapidly growing field showing signs of greater accuracy in screw placement during surgery. Patient-specific rods offer improved outcomes through higher correction rates and decreased rates of rod breakage while decreasing operative time. The objective of this review is to evaluate trends in the literature about machine learning, robot-guided spinal surgery, and patient-specific rods in the treatment of adult spinal deformity.

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.

Thoracic vertebra interbody fusion surgery with robotic assisted system in a swine model

Minimally invasive procedures have been increasing in spine surgery, and interest in robotic systems has inclined. In this study, we aimed to evaluate feasibility of a robotic-assisted thoracic spine interbody fusion in a swine model. Neurosurgeons performed the surgical procedures with robotic surgery certificates on the Da Vinci Xi Surgical System. Surgical approaches were applied using four ports while the swine was in the left lateral position. The surgical procedure was accomplished in 70 min including positioning and preparation of robotic system (20 min), placement of ports and thoracic dissection and confirmation of level with the C-arm system (10 min), discectomy and cage insertion (15 min), control of cage position via the C-arm system and closure (10 min). This study showed the anterior thoracic approach with robotic surgery is safe and feasible with providing a wide working area and high image quality.

The Path to Surgical Robotics in Neurosurgery

Robotic systems may help efficiently execute complicated tasks that require a high degree of accuracy, and this, in large part, explains why robotics have garnered widespread use in a variety of neurosurgical applications, including intracranial biopsies, spinal instrumentation, and placement of intracranial leads. The use of robotics in neurosurgery confers many benefits, and inherent limitations, to both surgeons and their patients. In this narrative review, we provide a historical overview of robotics and its implementation across various surgical specialties, and discuss the various robotic systems that have been developed specifically for neurosurgical applications. We also discuss the relative advantages of robotic systems compared to traditional surgical techniques, particularly as it pertains to integration of image guidance with the ability of the robotic arm to reliably execute pre-planned tasks. As more neurosurgeons adopt the use of robotics in their practice, we postulate that further technological advancements will become available that will help achieve improved technical capabilities, user experience, and overall patient clinical outcomes.

Patient-to-robot registration: The fate of robot-assisted stereotaxy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted stereotaxy (RAS) promises higher stereotactic accuracy (SA) and time efficiency (TE) than frame-based stereotaxy. However, both aspects are attributed to the problem of patient-to-robot registration.

OBJECTIVE

To examine different registration techniques regarding their SA and TE.

METHODS

This study enrolled 57 patients undergoing RAS with bone fiducial registration (BFR) or laser surface registration (LSR). SA was measured by the entry point error (EPE). Additionally, predictors of SA (registration error [RegE], distance-to-registration plane [DTC]) and TE (imaging, skin-to-skin) were assessed.

RESULTS

The mean SA was 1.0 ± 0.8 mm. BFR increased SA by reducing RegE and DTC. In LSR, EPE depended on DTC (face and forehead) with highest accuracy for DTC ≤100 mm. CT-based LSR exerted a higher SA than MR-based LSR. In BFR, TE was confined by the additional imaging.

CONCLUSION

Every registration technique counteracts one of the promises of RAS. New solutions are needed to increase the acceptance of RAS in neurosurgery.

First in man in-situ augmented reality pedicle screw navigation

Background

Augmented reality (AR) is a rising technology gaining increasing utility in medicine. By superimposing the surgical site and the operator's visual field with computer-generated information, it has the potential to enhance the cognitive skills of surgeons. This is the report of the first in man case with "direct holographic navigation" as part of a randomized controlled trial.

Case description

A pointing instrument was equipped with a sterile fiducial marker, which was used to obtain a digital representation of the intraoperative bony anatomy of the lumbar spine. Subsequently, a previously validated registration method was applied to superimpose the surgery plan with the intraoperative anatomy. The registration result is shown in situ as a 3D AR hologram of the preoperative 3D vertebra model with the planned screw trajectory and entry point for validation and approval by the surgeon. After achieving alignment with the surgery plan, a borehole is drilled and the pedicle screw placed. Postoperativ computer tomography was used to measure accuracy of this novel method for surgical navigation.

Outcome

Correct screw positions entirely within bone were documented with a postoperative CT, with an accuracy similar to current standard of care methods for surgical navigation. The patient was mobilized uneventfully on the first postoperative day with little pain medication and dismissed on the fourth postoperative day.

Conclusion

This first in man report of direct AR navigation demonstrates feasibility in vivo. The continuation of this randomized controlled study will evaluate the value of this novel technology.

Framed and non-framed robotics in neurosurgery: A 10-year single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Safety, efficacy and efficiency of neurosurgical robots are defined by their design (i.e., framed and non-framed) and procedural workflow (PW) (from image to surgery). The present study describes the quality indicators of three different robots in brain and spine surgery.

METHODS

This single-centre study enrolled 252 patients over a 10-year period. Safety (complication rate) and efficacy (diagnostic yield, pedicle screw placement) were determined. Predictors of workflow efficiency (e.g., skin-to-skin) were evaluated and compared to conventional techniques (neuronavigation, stereotaxy).

RESULTS

All robots showed excellent reliability (97.5%-100%) with low complication rates (4.5%-5.3%) and high efficacy (94.7%-97.7%). Robotics demonstrated a better time-efficiency than neuronavigation. However, there was no shortening of surgery time compared to conventional stereotaxy. Time-efficiency differed significantly between framed and non-framed workflows.

CONCLUSION

While all neurosurgical robots were reliable, safe and efficacious, there were significant differences in time-efficiency. PWs should be improved to increase the acceptance of robotics in neurosurgery.

Initiation of a Robotic Program in Spinal Surgery: Experience at a Three-Site Medical Center

OBJECTIVE

To highlight the early experience of implementing a robotic spine surgery program at a three-site medical center, evaluating the impact of increasing experience on the operative time and number of procedures performed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients undergoing robotic screw placement between September 4, 2018, and October 16, 2019, was conducted. Baseline characteristics as well as intraoperative and post-operative outcomes were obtained.

RESULTS

For a total of 77 patients, the mean age (SD) was 55.7 years (11.5) and 49.4% (n=38) were female. A total of 402 screws were placed (384 pedicle screws, 18 cortical screws) using robotic guidance with a median of two operative levels (interquartile range [IQR], 1 to 2). Median (IQR) estimated blood loss was 100 mL (50 to 200 mL) and the median (IQR) operative time was 224 minutes (193 to 307 minutes). With accrual of surgical experience, operative time declined significantly (R=-0.39; P<.001) whereas the number of procedures performed per week increased (R=0.30; P=.05) throughout the study period. Median (IQR) length of hospital stay following surgery was 2 days (IQR, 2 to 3 days). There were two screws requiring revision intraoperatively. No postoperative revisions were required, and no complications were encountered related to screw placement.

CONCLUSION

Early experience at our institution using a spinal robot has demonstrated no requirement for postoperative screw revisions and no complications related to screw malposition. The increased operative times were reduced as the frequency of procedures increased. Moreover, procedural times diminished over a short period with a weekly increasing number of procedures.

Achieving Value in Spine Surgery: 10 Major Cost Contributors

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVES

The increasing cost of healthcare overall and for spine surgery, coupled with the growing burden of spine-related disease and rising demand have necessitated a shift in practice standards with a new emphasis on value-based care. Despite multiple attempts to reconcile the discrepancy between national recommendations for appropriate use and the patterns of use employed in clinical practice, resources continue to be overused-often in the absence of any demonstrable clinical benefit. The following discussion illustrates 10 areas for further research and quality improvement.

METHODS

We present a narrative review of the literature regarding 10 features in spine surgery which are characterized by substantial disproportionate costs and minimal-if any-clear benefit. Discussion items were generated from a service-wide poll; topics mentioned with great frequency or emphasis were considered. Items are not listed in hierarchical order, nor is the list comprehensive.

RESULTS

We describe the cost and clinical data for the following 10 items: Over-referral, Over-imaging & Overdiagnosis; Advanced Imaging for Low Back Pain; Advanced imaging for C-Spine Clearance; Advanced Imaging for Other Spinal Trauma; Neuromonitoring for Cervical Spine; Neuromonitoring for Lumbar Spine/Single-Level Surgery; Bracing & Spinal Orthotics; Biologics; Robotic Assistance; Unnecessary perioperative testing.

CONCLUSIONS

In the pursuit of value in spine surgery we must define what quality is, and what costs we are willing to pay for each theoretical unit of quality. We illustrate 10 areas for future research and quality improvement initiatives, which are at present overpriced and underbeneficial.

Full endoscopic surgery for thoracic pathology: an assessment of supportive evidence

In the last five years, surgeons have applied endoscopic transforaminal surgical techniques mastered in the lumbar spine to the treatment of thoracic pathology.

The aim of this systematic review was to collate the available literature to determine the place and efficacy of full endoscopic approaches used in the treatment of thoracic disc prolapse and stenosis.

An electronic literature search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane database and Google Scholar was performed as suggested by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statements. Included were any full-text articles referring to full endoscopic thoracic surgical procedures in any language.

We identified 17 patient series, one cohort study and 13 case reports with single or of up to three patients.

Although the majority included disc pathology, 11 papers related cord compression in a proportion of cases to ossification of the ligamentum flavum or posterior longitudinal ligament. Two studies described the treatment of discitis and one reported the use of endoscopy for tumour resection.

Where reported, excellent or good outcomes were achieved for full endoscopic procedures in a mean of 81% of patients (range 46–100%) with a complication rate of 8% (range 0–15%), comparing favourably with rates reported after open discectomy (anterior, posterolateral and thoracoscopic) or by endoscopic tubular assisted approaches. Twenty-one of the 31 author groups reported use of local anaesthesia plus sedation rather than general anaesthesia, providing ‘self-neuromonitoring’ by allowing patients to respond to cord and/or nerve stimuli.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:50-60. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200080

Review of Advanced Medical Telerobots

The advent of telerobotic systems has revolutionized various aspects of the industry and human life. This technology is designed to augment human sensorimotor capabilities to extend them beyond natural competence. Classic examples are space and underwater applications when distance and access are the two major physical barriers to be combated with this technology. In modern examples, telerobotic systems have been used in several clinical applications, including teleoperated surgery and telerehabilitation. In this regard, there has been a significant amount of research and development due to the major benefits in terms of medical outcomes. Recently telerobotic systems are combined with advanced artificial intelligence modules to better share the agency with the operator and open new doors of medical automation. In this review paper, we have provided a comprehensive analysis of the literature considering various topologies of telerobotic systems in the medical domain while shedding light on different levels of autonomy for this technology, starting from direct control, going up to command-tracking autonomous telerobots. Existing challenges, including instrumentation, transparency, autonomy, stochastic communication delays, and stability, in addition to the current direction of research related to benefit in telemedicine and medical automation, and future vision of this technology, are discussed in this review paper.

Global adoption of robotic technology into neurosurgical practice and research

Recent technological advancements have led to the development and implementation of robotic surgery in several specialties, including neurosurgery. Our aim was to carry out a worldwide survey among neurosurgeons to assess the adoption of and attitude toward robotic technology in the neurosurgical operating room and to identify factors associated with use of robotic technology. The online survey was made up of nine or ten compulsory questions and was distributed via the European Association of the Neurosurgical Societies (EANS) and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) in February and March 2018. From a total of 7280 neurosurgeons who were sent the survey, we received 406 answers, corresponding to a response rate of 5.6%, mostly from Europe and North America. Overall, 197 neurosurgeons (48.5%) reported having used robotic technology in clinical practice. The highest rates of adoption of robotics were observed for Europe (54%) and North America (51%). Apart from geographical region, only age under 30, female gender, and absence of a non-academic setting were significantly associated with clinical use of robotics. The Mazor family (32%) and ROSA (26%) robots were most commonly reported among robot users. Our study provides a worldwide overview of neurosurgical adoption of robotic technology. Almost half of the surveyed neurosurgeons reported having clinical experience with at least one robotic system. Ongoing and future trials should aim to clarify superiority or non-inferiority of neurosurgical robotic applications and balance these potential benefits with considerations on acquisition and maintenance costs.

Surgeons' Learning Curve of Renaissance Robotic Surgical System

INTRODUCTION

A few articles on robot-assisted pedicle screw placement described the learning curve but failed to report on the overall operative time, including cases in which the robotic system malfunctioned. The purpose of this study was to identify a single surgeon's learning curve including estimated blood loss, surgery time, anesthesia time, robot time, and complications.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed between January 2016 and August 2018 for patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion using the Mazor robot. Based on the charts, the robot time, time of anesthesia, and surgery time were recorded, as were the complications, misplacement of screws, and blood loss.

RESULTS

Of 62 robot-assisted surgeries scheduled, only 46 were performed (74.2%) upon patients with a mean age of 63.3 ± 13.0 years. The mean follow-up time was 13.2 ± 8.0 months and most commonly a fusion from L4 to S1 was performed (20/46, 43.5%). A high improvement in estimated intraoperative blood loss was observed of 755.7 ± 344.7 mL (slope = -9.89). A decrease in time in anesthesia, surgery, and robotic usage was identified with a slope factor of -3.64 (R ² = .22, SE = 85.4, P < .005), -3.97 (R ² = 0.30, SE 75.8, P < .005), -0.69 (R ² = .07, SE = 27.8, P < .09), respectively. Furthermore, a decrease in pedicle screw insertion time and operative time was found (slope = -0.05, R ² = .02, SE = 3.4, P = .37). In total, 5 major complications (cases 8, 19, 21, 35, 43) and 6 minor complications (cases 4, 14, 15, 20, 29), were identified (21.7%) without any learning curve.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot pedicle screw insertion shows no major learning curve; however, the blood loss and the installation process of the system improved with experience.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Frameless Robot-Assisted Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery: An Initial Experience

BACKGROUND

Modern robotic-assist surgical systems have revolutionized stereotaxy for a variety of procedures by increasing operative efficiency while preserving and even improving accuracy and safety. However, experience with robotic systems in deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To present an initial series of DBS surgery performed utilizing a frameless robotic solution for image-guided stereotaxy, and report on operative efficiency, stereotactic accuracy, and complications.

METHODS

This study included the initial 20 consecutive patients undergoing bilateral robot-assisted DBS. The prior 20 nonrobotic, frameless cohort of DBS cases was sampled as a baseline historic control. For both cohorts, patient demographic and clinical data were collected including postoperative complications. Intraoperative duration and number of Microelectrode recording (MER) and final lead passes were recorded. For the robot-assisted cohort, 2D radial errors were calculated.

RESULTS

Mean case times (total operating room, anesthesia, and operative times) were all significantly decreased in the robot-assisted cohort (all P-values < .02) compared to frameless DBS. When looking at trends in case times, operative efficiency improved over time in the robot-assisted cohort across all time assessment points. Mean radial error in the robot-assisted cohort was 1.40 ± 0.11 mm, and mean depth error was 1.05 ± 0.18 mm. There was a significant decrease in the average number of MER passes in the robot-assisted cohort (1.05) compared to the nonrobotic cohort (1.45, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of application of frameless robotic-assistance with the Mazor Renaissance platform (Mazor Robotics Ltd, Caesarea, Israel) for DBS surgery, and our findings reveal that an initial experience is safe and can have a positive impact on operative efficiency, accuracy, and safety.

The safety and accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw internal fixation for spine disease: a meta-analysis

Aims

The aim of this study was to systematically compare the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted (RA) technique with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted (CT) pedicle screw insertion for spine disease.

Methods

A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and WANFANG for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the safety and accuracy of RA compared with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion for spine disease from 2012 to 2019. This meta-analysis used Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance method with mixed-effects model for heterogeneity, calculating the odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The results of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, and risk of bias were analyzed.

Results

Ten RCTs with 713 patients and 3,331 pedicle screws were included. Compared with CT, the accuracy rate of RA was superior in Grade A with statistical significance and Grade A + B without statistical significance. Compared with CT, the operating time of RA was longer. The difference between RA and CT was statistically significant in radiation dose. Proximal facet joint violation occurred less in RA than in CT. The postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of RA was smaller than that of CT, and there were some interesting outcomes in our subgroup analysis.

Conclusion

RA technique could be viewed as an accurate and safe pedicle screw implantation method compared to CT. A robotic system equipped with optical intraoperative navigation is superior to CT in accuracy. RA pedicle screw insertion can improve accuracy and maintain stability for some challenging areas.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(10):653-666.

Time Efficiency in Stereotactic Robot-Assisted Surgery: An Appraisal of the Surgical Procedure and Surgeon's Learning Curve

BACKGROUND

Frame-based stereotactic procedures are still the gold standard in neurosurgery. However, there is an increasing interest in robot-assisted technologies. Introducing these increasingly complex tools in the clinical setting raises the question about the time efficiency of the system and the essential learning curve of the surgeon.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled a consecutive series of patients undergoing a robot-assisted procedure after first system installation at one institution. All procedures were performed by the same neurosurgeon to capture the learning curve. The objective read-out were the surgical procedure time (SPT), the skin-to-skin time, and the intraoperative registration time (IRT) after laser surface registration (LSR), bone fiducial registration (BFR), and skin fiducial registration (SFR), as well as the quality of the registration (as measured by the fiducial registration error [FRE]). The time measures were compared to those for a patient group undergoing classic frame-based stereotaxy.

RESULTS

In the first 7 months, we performed 31 robot-assisted surgeries (26 biopsies, 3 stereotactic electroencephalography [SEEG] implantations, and 2 endoscopic procedures). The SPT was depending on the actual type of surgery (biopsies: 85.0 ± 36.1 min; SEEG: 154.9 ± 75.9 min; endoscopy: 105.5 ± 1.1 min; p = 0.036). For the robot-assisted biopsies, there was a significant reduction in SPT within the evaluation period, reaching the level of frame-based surgeries (58.1 ± 17.9 min; p < 0.001). The IRT was depending on the applied registration method (LSR: 16.7 ± 2.3 min; BFR: 3.5 ± 1.1 min; SFR: 3.5 ± 1.6 min; p < 0.001). In contrast to BFR and SFR, there was a significant reduction in LSR time during that period (p = 0.038). The FRE differed between the applied registration methods (LSR: 0.60 ± 0.17 mm; BFR: 0.42 ± 0.15 mm; SFR: 2.17 ± 0.78 mm; p < 0.001). There was a significant improvement in LSR quality during the evaluation period (p = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

Introducing stereotactic, robot-assisted surgery in an established clinical setting initially necessitates a prolonged intraoperative preparation time. However, there is a steep learning curve during the first cases, reaching the time level of classic frame-based stereotaxy. Thus, a stereotactic robot can be integrated into daily routine within a decent period of time, thereby expanding the neurosurgeons' armamentarium, especially for procedures with multiple trajectories.