Effect of Robot-Assisted Surgery on Lumbar Pedicle Screw Internal Fixation in Patients with Osteoporosis

Comparative efficacy of robotic-assisted and freehand techniques for pedicle screw placement in spinal disorders: a meta-analysis and systematic review

The efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement compared to traditional fluoroscopy-guided techniques are of great interest in the field of spinal surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of these two methods in patients with spinal diseases. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. We included randomized controlled trials comparing robotic-assisted and fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw placement in patients with spinal diseases. Outcome measures included the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, postoperative complication rates, intraoperative radiation exposure time, and duration of surgery. Data were analyzed using Stata software. Our analysis included 12 studies. It revealed significantly higher accuracy in pedicle screw placement with robotic assistance (odds ratio [OR] = 2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.20-3.64, P < 0.01). Postoperative complication rates, intraoperative radiation exposure time, and duration of surgery were similar between the two techniques (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.31 to 1.68, P = 0.56 for complication rates; weighted mean difference [WMD] = - 0.13, 95% CI = - 0.93 to 0.68, P = 0.86 for radiation exposure time; WMD = 0.30, 95% CI = - 0.06 to 0.66, P = 0.06 for duration of surgery). Robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement offers superior placement accuracy compared to fluoroscopy-guided techniques. Postoperative complication rates, intraoperative radiation exposure time, and duration of surgery were comparable for both methods. Future studies should explore the potential for fewer complications with the robotic-assisted approach as suggested by the lower point estimate.

Pedicle screw placement accuracy in robot-assisted versus image-guided freehand surgery of thoraco-lumbar spine (ROBARTHRODESE): study protocol for a single-centre randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Robotic spinal surgery may result in better pedicle screw placement accuracy, and reduction in radiation exposure and length of stay, compared to freehand surgery. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to compare screw placement accuracy of robot-assisted surgery with integrated 3D computer-assisted navigation versus freehand surgery with 2D fluoroscopy for arthrodesis of the thoraco-lumbar spine.

METHODS

This is a single-centre evaluator-blinded RCT with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Participants (n = 300) will be randomized into two groups, robot-assisted (Mazor X Stealth Edition) versus freehand, after stratification based on the planned number of pedicle screws needed for surgery. The primary outcome is the proportion of pedicle screws placed with grade A accuracy (Gertzbein-Robbins classification) on postoperative computed tomography images. The secondary outcomes are intervention time, operation room occupancy time, length of stay, estimated blood loss, surgeon's radiation exposure, screw fracture/loosening, superior-level facet joint violation, complication rate, reoperation rate on the same level or one level above, functional and clinical outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index, pain, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, sensory and motor status) and cost-utility analysis.

DISCUSSION

This RCT will provide insight into whether robot-assisted surgery with the newest generation spinal robot yields better pedicle screw placement accuracy than freehand surgery. Potential benefits of robot-assisted surgery include lower complication and revision rates, shorter length of stay, lower radiation exposure and reduction of economic cost of the overall care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05553028. Registered on September 23, 2022.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Fluoroscopic-Guided Surgery on the Accuracy of Spine Pedicle Screw Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Spinal fusion is a common method by which surgeons decrease instability and deformity of the spinal segment targeted. Pedicle screws are vital tools in fusion surgeries and advancements in technology have introduced several modalities of screw placement. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in robot-assisted (RA) versus fluoroscopic-guided (FG) techniques. The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were systematically reviewed from January 2007 through to August 8, 2022, to identify relevant studies. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was determined using the Gertzbein-Robbins (GR) classification system. Facet joint violation (FJV), total case radiation dosage, total case radiation time, total operating room (OR) time, and total case blood loss were collected. Twenty-one articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Successful screw accuracy (GR Grade A or B) was found to be 1.02 (95% confidence interval: 1.01 - 1.04) times more likely with the RA technique. In defining accuracy solely based on the GR Grade A criteria, screws placed with RA were 1.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.06 - 1.15) times more likely to be accurate. There was no significant difference between the two techniques with respect to blood loss (Hedges' g: 1.16, 95% confidence interval: -0.75 to 3.06) or case radiation time (Hedges' g: -0.34, 95% CI: -1.22 to 0.53). FG techniques were associated with shorter operating room times (Hedges' g: -1.03, 95% confidence interval: -1.76 to -0.31), and higher case radiation dosage (Hedges' g: 1.61, 95% confidence interval: 1.11 to 2.10). This review suggests that RA may slightly increase pedicle screw accuracy and decrease per-case radiation dosage compared to FG techniques. However, total operating times for RA cases are greater than those for FG cases.

The positional consistency between guidewire and cannulated or solid screw in robot-assisted spinal internal fixation surgery

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the positional consistency between the guidewire and the screw in spinal internal fixation surgery.

METHODS

This study involved 64 patients who underwent robot-assisted thoracic or lumbar pedicle screw fixation surgery. Guidewires were inserted with the assistance of the Tirobot. Either cannulated screws or solid screws were inserted. Guidewire and screw accuracy was measured using CT images based on the Gertzbein and Robbins scale. The positional consistency between guidewire and screw was evaluated based on the fused CT images, which could graphically and quantitatively demonstrate the consistency. The consistency was evaluated based on a grading system that considered the maximum distance and angulation between the centerline of the guidewire and the screw in the region of the pedicle.

RESULTS

A total of 322 screws were placed including 206 cannulated ones and 116 solid ones. Based on the Gertzbein and Robbins scale, 97.5% of the guidewires were grade A, and 94.1% of the screws were grade A. Based on our guidewire-screw consistency scale, 85% in cannulated group, and 69.8% in solid group, were grade A. Both solid and cannulated screws may alter trajectory compared to the guidewires. The positional accuracy and guidewire-screw consistency in the solid screw group is significantly worse than that in the cannulated screw group. The cortical bone of the pedicle has a positive guide effect on either solid or cannulated screws.

CONCLUSION

The pedicle screws may alter trajectory despite the guidance of the guidewires. Solid screws show worse positional accuracy and guidewire-screw consistency compared with cannulated screws. Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered and approved by our center's institutional review board.

Robotics and navigation in spine surgery: A narrative review

Introduction

In recent decades, there has been a rising trend of spinal surgical interventional techniques, especially Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (MIS), to improve the quality of life in an effective and safe manner. However, MIS techniques tend to be difficult to adapt and are associated with an increased risk of radiation exposure. This led to the development of 'computer-assisted surgery' in 1983, which integrated CT images into spinal procedures evolving into the present day robotic-assisted spine surgery. The authors aim to review the development of spine surgeries and provide an overview of the benefits offered. It includes all the comparative studies available to date.

Methods

The manuscript has been prepared as per "SANRA-a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles". The authors searched Pubmed, Embase, and Scopus using the terms "(((((Robotics) OR (Navigation)) OR (computer assisted)) OR (3D navigation)) OR (Freehand)) OR (O-Arm)) AND (spine surgery)" and 68 articles were included for analysis excluding review articles, meta-analyses, or systematic literature.

Results

The authors noted that 49 out of 68 studies showed increased precision of pedicle screw insertion, 10 out of 19 studies show decreased radiation exposure, 13 studies noted decreased operative time, 4 out of 8 studies showed reduced hospital stay and significant reduction in rates of infections, neurological deficits, the need for revision surgeries, and rates of radiological ASD, with computer-assisted techniques.

Conclusion

Computer-assisted surgeries have better accuracy of pedicle screw insertion, decreased blood loss and operative time, reduced radiation exposure, improved functional outcomes, and lesser complications.

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement in spine surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement technique offers greater accuracy than the traditional freehand screw placement technique. However, it is controversial whether there is a difference between the two procedures in terms of improved clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science to identify potentially eligible articles. Indispensable data such as the year of publication, study type, age, number of patients, sex distribution, and outcomes were extracted. The outcome indicators of interest included Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) score, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and post-operative length of stay. RevMan 5.4.1 was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies with 508 participants were included. Eight were related to ΔVAS, six were related to ΔODI, seven were related to operative time, five were related to intraoperative blood loss, and seven were related to the length of hospitalization. The results showed that, in terms of ΔVAS (95% CI, -1.20 to -0.36, P = 0.0003) and ΔODI (95% CI, -2.50 to -0.48, P = 0.004), robot-assisted pedicle screw placement technique scored higher than traditional freehand technique. Additionally, the intraoperative blood loss (95% CI, -140.34 to -10.94, P = 0.02) and the length of hospitalization (95% CI, -2.59 to -0.31, P = 0.01) for patients who underwent robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement were less than that of those who underwent the conventional freehand screw placement. No significant difference was found between robot-assisted techniques and conventional freehand techniques in pedicle screw placement in surgical time (95% CI, -2.24 to 26.32, P = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted technique helps improve short-term clinical outcomes, reduce intraoperative blood loss and patient suffering, and shorten recovery time compared to the freehand technique.

A comparative study of robot-assisted and traditional surgeries in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures based on 1-year follow-up observation

BACKGROUND: There are conflicting results for robot-assisted (RA) pedicle screw fixation compared with freehand (FH) pedicle screw fixation. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to retrospectively compare the accuracy and efficacy of RA percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and traditional freehand FH pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures. METHODS: A total of 26 cases were assigned to the RA group, and 24 cases were assigned to the FH group. The operation time, bleeding volume, and visual analog scale (VAS) score 1 day after the operation, and the anterior/posterior (A/P) vertebral height ratio of the injured vertebrae at 3 days and at internal fixation removal 1 year after the operation were compared between the two groups. Pedicle screw position accuracy was assessed according to Gertzbein criteria. RESULTS: The operation times of the RA group and FH group were 138.69 ± 32.67 minutes and 103.67 ± 14.53 minutes, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant. The intraoperative blood loss was 49.23 ± 22.56 ml in the RA group and 78.33 ± 23.90 ml in the FH group, and the difference was statistically significant. There was a significant difference in the A/P vertebral height ratio of the injured vertebrae 3 days after the operation compared with before the operation in both groups (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference in the A/P vertebral height ratio of the injured vertebrae 3 days after the operation compared with that at fixation removal in both groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The application of RA orthopedic treatment for thoracolumbar fractures can achieve good fracture reduction.

Accuracies of various types of spinal robot in robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With the popularization of robot-assisted spinal surgeries, it is still uncertain whether robots with different designs could lead to different results in the accuracy of pedicle screw placement. This study aimed to compare the pedicle screw inserting accuracies among the spinal surgeries assisted by various types of robot and estimate the rank probability of each robot-assisted operative technique involved.

METHODS

The electronic literature database of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CNKI, WANFANG and the Cochrane Library was searched in November 2021. The primary outcome was the Gertzbein-Robbins classification of pedicle screws inserted with various operative techniques. After the data extraction and direct meta-analysis process, a network model was established in the Bayesian framework and further analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

Among all the 15 eligible RCTs, 4 types of robot device, namely Orthbot, Renaissance, SpineAssist and TiRobot, were included in this study. In the network meta-analysis, the Orthbot group (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13-0.58), the Renaissance group (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.86), the SpineAssist group (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06-0.34) and the conventional surgery group (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.13-0.31) were inferior to the TiRobot group in the proportion of grade A pedicle screws. Moreover, the results of rank probabilities revealed that in terms of accuracy, the highest-ranked robot was TiRobot, followed by Renaissance and Orthbot.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, current RCT evidence indicates that TiRobot has an advantage in the accuracy of the pedicle screw placement, while there is no significant difference among the Orthbot-assisted technique, the Renaissance-assisted technique, the conventional freehand technique, and the SpineAssist-assisted technique in accuracy.

Accuracy and digital screw path design of TiRobot-assisted pedicle screw placement for lumbar spondylolisthesis

PURPOSE

To investigate lumbar spondylolisthesis screw placement assisted by TiRobot in terms of digital screw path design, accurate implementation, and accuracy evaluation method.

METHODS

In this study, we enrolled 40 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis between December 2020 and August 2021 who underwent spine surgery at the Affiliated Hospital of PuTian University. Pre-operative computed tomography position and screw path designation, intra-operative pedicle screw placement according to pre-operative planning, and post-operative evaluation of the accuracy of screw placement were performed. 3D coordinates of the entry and exit points before and after the operation were collected. The qualified points at different levels of accuracy were counted. The screw placement accuracy was based on the absolute difference using the Chi-squared test.

RESULTS

In total, 194 screws were successfully implanted with no screws penetrating the cortex. The absolute difference of entry points X, Y, and Z coordinates before and after the operation was 0.425 ± 0.294 mm, 0.417 ± 0.310 mm, and 0.466 ± 0.327 mm, respectively. The corresponding values in terms of exit points were 0.702 ± 0.470 mm, 0.963 ± 0.595mm, and 0.983 ± 0.566 mm, respectively. No obvious differences in coordinates before and after the operation were observed with an entry point degree of accuracy of ≥ 1.2 mm and exit point degree of accuracy of ≥ 2.1 mm. Therefore, the real surgery was consistent with the design.

CONCLUSIONS

TiRobot-assisted lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery achieved optimal path designation and precise surgery.

TiRobot-assisted percutaneous kyphoplasty in the management of multilevel (more than three levels) osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of TiRobot-assisted kyphoplasty with that of the traditional fluoroscopy-assisted approach in treating multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we collected data from 71 patients (TiRobot-assisted group, n = 39; fluoroscopy-assisted group, n = 32) with multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture treated with unilateral traditional TiRobot-assisted or fluoroscopy-assisted percutaneous kyphoplasty. The operative time, infusion volume, length of stay (LOS), hospital expenses, visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), radiation exposure, puncture deviation, anterior height of diseased vertebrae, local kyphotic angle, bone cement distribution, and bone cement leakage were compared between the TiRobot- and fluoroscopy-assisted groups.

RESULTS

Of the 257 treated vertebrae, the average amount of bone cement injected in the TiRobot-assisted (142 vertebrae) and fluoroscopy-assisted (115 vertebrae) groups was 4.6 mL and 4.5 mL, respectively. The VAS score was significantly lower in the TiRobot-assisted group at 24 hours post-operatively (p = 0.006). The X-ray frequency was 34.7 times in the TiRobot-assisted group and 51.7 times in the fluoroscopy-assisted group (p < 0.001). In addition to the operative time, cumulative radiation dose for the surgeon and patient was significantly lower in the TiRobot-assisted group. The hospital expenses of the TiRobot-assisted group were significantly higher (p < 0.001). The puncture deviation and bone cement distribution were better in the TiRobot-assisted group (p < 0.001). Bone cement leakage was found in 18 and 29 cases in the TiRobot- and fluoroscopy-assisted groups, respectively (p = 0.010). One patient in the fluoroscopy-assisted group experienced radiculopathy due to a misplaced puncture but recovered in three months. No radiculopathy was observed in the TiRobot-assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

TiRobot-assisted percutaneous multilevel kyphoplasty is more accurate and has smaller radiometry, a more uniform bone cement distribution, and lower bone cement leakage. This method was therefore accurate and safe.

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.

Comparing radiation dose of image-guided techniques in lumbar fusion surgery with pedicle screw insertion; A systematic review

Background Context

Fluoroscopic devices can be used to visualize subcutaneous and osseous tissue, a useful feature during pedicle screw insertion in lumbar fusion surgery. It is important that both patient and surgeon are exposed as little as possible, since these devices use potential harmful ionizing radiation.

Purpose

This study aims to compare radiation exposure of different image-guided techniques in lumbar fusion surgery with pedicle screw insertion.

Study Design

Systematic review.

Methods

Cochrane, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases were used to acquire relevant studies. Eligibility criteria were lumbar and/or sacral spine, pedicle screw, mGray and/or Sievert and/or mrem, radiation dose and/or radiation exposure. Image-guided techniques were divided in five groups: conventional C-arm, C-arm navigation, C-arm robotic, O-arm navigation and O-arm robotic. Comparisons were made based on effective dose for patients and surgeons, absorbed dose for patients and surgeons and exposure. Risk of bias was assessed using the 2017 Cochrane Risk of Bias tool on RCTs and the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool on NRCTs. Level of evidence was assessed using the guidelines of Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine 2011.

Results

A total of 1423 studies were identified of which 38 were included in the analysis and assigned to one of the five groups. Results of radiation dose per procedure and per pedicle screw were described in dose ranges. Conventional C-arm appeared to result in higher effective dose for surgeons, higher absorbed dose for patients and higher exposure, compared to C-arm navigation/robotic and O-arm navigation/robotic. Level of evidence was 3 to 4 in 29 studies. Risk of bias of RCTs was intermediate, mostly due to inadequate blinding. Overall risk of bias score in NRCTs was determined as 'serious'.

Conclusions

Ranges of radiation doses using different modalities during pedicle screw insertion in lumbar fusion surgery are wide. Based on the highest numbers in the ranges, conventional C-arm tends to lead to a higher effective dose for surgeons, higher absorbed dose for patients and higher exposure, compared to C-arm-, and O-arm navigation/robotic. The level of evidence is low and risk of bias is fairly high. In future studies, heterogeneity should be limited by standardizing measurement methods and thoroughly describing the image-guided technique settings.

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

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

Comparison of the Accuracy and Safety of TiRobot-Assisted and Fluoroscopy-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement for the Treatment of Thoracolumbar Fractures

OBJECTIVE

Studies have compared the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted techniques for inserting conventional open pedicle screws for spinal surgery. However, no relevant studies have confirmed that robot-assisted percutaneous screw placement is better than fluoroscopic percutaneous screw placement for the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures. This study compared the accuracy and safety of TiRobot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement with those of the fluoroscopy-assisted percutaneous technique for the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 126 patients with thoracolumbar fractures who underwent percutaneous pedicle screw placement. Sixty-five patients were treated with the TiRobot-assisted technique and 61 patients were treated with the fluoroscopy-assisted technique. Patient demographics, accuracy of screw placement (according to the Gertzbein and Robbins scale of grades A to E), screw insertion angle, radiation exposure, surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, incision length, hospital expenses, surgical site infection, and neurological injury of the TiRobot-assisted and fluoroscopy-assisted groups were compared using Student's t-test, Pearson χ² test, or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 729 screws were placed (TiRobot-assisted group: 374 screws; fluoroscopy-assisted group: 355 screws). In the TiRobot-assisted group, 82.8% of screws were optimally positioned (grade A); however, the placement grades of the remaining screws were categorized as grade B (13.3%), grade C (3.2%), and grade D (0.5%). In the fluoroscopy-assisted group, 66.7% of the screws were optimally positioned (grade A); however, the placement grades of the remaining screws were categorized as grade B (21.4%), grade C (7.6%), grade D (3.6%), and grade E (0.5%). The proportion of clinically acceptable screws (grade A or B) was greater in the TiRobot-assisted group than in the fluoroscopy-assisted group. Additionally, the TiRobot-assisted group had a significantly larger mean screw insertion angle (22.27° ± 5.48° vs 20.55° ± 5.15°), larger incision length (13.86 ± 1.24 cm vs 12.77 ± 1.43 cm), and higher hospital expenses (69061.55 ± 7166.60 yuan vs 59383.85 ± 5019.64 yuan) than the fluoroscopy-assisted group. There were no significant differences in the intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, and rates of surgical site infection and neurological injury in both groups (p > 0.05). However, the TiRobot-assisted group had significantly better surgical times, radiation times, and radiation exposure than the fluoroscopy-assisted group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous TiRobot-assisted pedicle screw placement is a safe, useful, and potentially more accurate alternative to the percutaneous fluoroscopy-assisted technique for treating thoracolumbar fractures.

Robot-assisted and augmented reality-assisted spinal instrumentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of screw accuracy and outcomes over the last decade

OBJECTIVE

The use of technology-enhanced methods in spine surgery has increased immensely over the past decade. Here, the authors present the largest systematic review and meta-analysis to date that specifically addresses patient-centered outcomes, including the risk of inaccurate screw placement and perioperative outcomes in spinal surgeries using robotic instrumentation and/or augmented reality surgical navigation (ARSN).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases spanning the last decade (January 2011-November 2021) was performed to present all clinical studies comparing robot-assisted instrumentation and ARSN with conventional instrumentation techniques in lumbar spine surgery. The authors compared these two technologies as they relate to screw accuracy, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative time, length of stay (LOS), perioperative complications, radiation dose and time, and the rate of reoperation.

RESULTS

A total of 64 studies were analyzed that included 11,113 patients receiving 20,547 screws. Robot-assisted instrumentation was associated with less risk of inaccurate screw placement (p < 0.0001) regardless of control arm approach (freehand, fluoroscopy guided, or navigation guided), fewer reoperations (p < 0.0001), fewer perioperative complications (p < 0.0001), lower EBL (p = 0.0005), decreased LOS (p < 0.0001), and increased intraoperative time (p = 0.0003). ARSN was associated with decreased radiation exposure compared with robotic instrumentation (p = 0.0091) and fluoroscopy-guided (p < 0.0001) techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Altogether, the pooled data suggest that technology-enhanced thoracolumbar instrumentation is advantageous for both patients and surgeons. As the technology progresses and indications expand, it remains essential to continue investigations of both robotic instrumentation and ARSN to validate meaningful benefit over conventional instrumentation techniques in spine surgery.

Association of robot-assisted techniques with the accuracy rates of pedicle screw placement: A network pooling analysis

BACKGROUND

Traditional paired meta-analyses have yielded inconsistent results for the safety and effectiveness of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement due to the high heterogeneity within studies. This study evaluated the clinical effectiveness and safety of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement.

METHODS

The Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched with no language limitations from inception to Jan 4, 2022. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to report results. The main outcomes were accuracy of pedicle screw placement, proximal facet joint violation, and complications. The study protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42022301417).

FINDINGS

26 trials including 2046 participants evaluating robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement were included in this study. Our pooled results showed that Renaissance (OR 2.86; [95% CI 1.79 to 4.57]) and TiRobot (OR 3.10; [95% CI 2.19 to 4.40]) yielded higher rates of perfect pedicle screw insertion (Grades A) than the conventional freehand technique. Renaissance (OR 2.82; [95% CI 1.51 to 5.25]) and TiRobot (OR 4.58; [95% CI 2.65 to 7.89]) yielded higher rates of clinically acceptable pedicle screw insertion (Grades A+B). However, ROSA, SpineAssist, and Orthobot were not associated with higher perfect pedicle screw insertion and clinically acceptable pedicle screw insertion rates. Robot-assisted techniques were associated with low rates of proximal facet joint violation (OR 0.18; [95% CI 0.10 to 0.32]; I²:9.55%) and overall complications (OR 0.38; [95% CI 0.23 to 0.63]; I²:27.05%). Moreover, robot-assisted techniques were associated with lower radiation doses (MD -14.38; [95% CI -25.62 to -3.13]; I²:100.00%).

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that only Renaissance and TiRobot systems are associated with high accuracy rates of pedicle screw placement. Robotic-assisted techniques hold great promise in spinal surgery due to their safety and effectiveness.

FUNDING

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81871818), Tangdu Hospital Seed Talent Program (Fei-Long Wei) and Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (No.2019JM-265).

Comparison of Accuracy and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Pedicle Screw Placement in Posterior Cervical Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective controlled study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy and clinical outcomes of robot-assisted (RA) and fluoroscopy-guided (FG) pedicle screw placement in posterior cervical surgery.

METHODS

This study included 58 patients. The primary outcome measures were the 1-time success rate and the accuracy of pedicle screw placement according to the Gertzbein-Robbins scales. The secondary outcome measures, including the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, cumulative radiation time, radiation dose, intraoperative advent events, and postoperative complications, were recorded and analyzed. The Japanese Orthopedics Association (JOA) scores and Neck Disability Index (NDI) were used to assess the neurological function of patients before and at 3 and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The rate of grade A was significantly higher in the RA group than in the FG group (90.6% and 71.1%; P < .001). The clinically acceptable accuracy was 97.2% in the RA group and 90.7% in the FG group (P = .009). Moreover, the 1-time success rate was significantly higher in the RA group than in the FG group. The RA group had less radiation time (P < .001) and less radiation dose (P = .002) but longer operative time (P = .001). There were no significant differences in terms of intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, intraoperative adverse events, postoperative complications, JOA scores, and NDI scores at each follow-up time point between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The RA technique achieved higher accuracy and 1-time success rate of pedicle screw placement in posterior cervical surgery while achieving comparable clinical outcomes.

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

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Hybrid versus total sublaminar wires in patients with spinal muscular atrophy undergoing scoliosis surgery

Background

Early versions of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) scoliosis correction surgery often involved sublaminar devices. Recently, the utilization of pedicle screws has gained much popularity. Pedicle screws are generally believed to provide additional deformity correction, but pedicle size and rotational deformity limit their application in the thoracic spine, resulting in a hybrid construct involving pedicle screws and sublaminar wire. Studies of the efficacy of hybrid instrumentation in SMA scoliosis are often limited by the scarcity of the disease itself. In this study, we aimed to compare the surgical outcomes between hybrid constructs involving pedicle screws and sublaminar wire and sublaminar wire alone in patients with SMA scoliosis.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records and radiographic assessments of patients with SMA scoliosis who underwent corrective surgery between 1993 and 2017. The radiographic assessments included deformity correction and progressive changes in the major curve angle, pelvic tilt (PT) and coronal balance (CB). The correction of deformities was observed postoperatively and at the patient’s 2-year follow-up to test the efficacy of each type of construct.

Results

Thirty-three patients were included in this study. There were 14 and 19 patients in the wiring and hybrid construct groups, respectively. The hybrid construct group demonstrated a higher major curve angle correction (50.5° ± 11.2° vs. 36.4° ± 8.4°, p < 0.001), a higher apical vertebral rotation correction (10.6° ± 3.9° vs. 4.8° ± 2.6°, p < 0.001), and a reduced progression of the major curve angle at the 2-year follow-up (5.1° ± 2.9° vs. 8.7° ± 4.8°, p < 0.001). A moderate correlation was observed between the magnitude of correction of the apical vertebral rotation angle and the major curve (r = 0.528, p = 0.002).

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that hybrid instrumentation can provide a greater magnitude of correction in major curve and apical rotation as well as less major curve progression than sublaminar wire instrumentation alone in patients with SMA scoliosis. Level of evidence III

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04737-0.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparison of accuracy and safety between robot-assisted and conventional fluoroscope assisted placement of pedicle screws in thoracolumbar spine: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to explore the screw positioning accuracy, complications related to pedicle screw implantation, revision rate and radiation exposure between robot screw placement and traditional fluoroscopic screw placement.

METHODS

We searched several databases, including CNKI, Wanfang database, cqvip datebase, PubMed, Cochrane library and EMBASE, to identify articles that might meet the criteria. Meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 13 randomized controlled trial were included. The results showed that the pedicle screw accuracy of the robot assisted group was significantly better than that of the conventional freehand (FH) group (OR = 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] [2.75,4.45], P < .0001). There was no significant difference in the complications caused by pedicle screw implantation between the robot-assisted group and the conventional FH group [OR = 0.39, 95%CI (0.10,1.48), P = .17]. The rate of facet joint invasion in the robot-assisted group was significantly lower than that in the conventional FH group (OR = 0.06, 95%CI [0.01,0.29], P = .0006). The revision rate in the robot-assisted group was significantly lower than that in the conventional FH group (OR = 0.19, 95%CI [0.05,0.71], P = 0.0.01). There was no significant difference in the average radiation of pedicle screws implantation between the robot-assisted group and the conventional FH (mean difference = -7.94, 95%CI [-20.18,4.30], P = .20).

CONCLUSION

The robot-assisted group was significantly better than the conventional FH in the accuracy of pedicle screw placement and facet joint invasion rate and revision rate. There was no significant difference in the complication and fluoroscopy time between the two groups.

Comparison of clinical effectiveness of fenestrated and conventional pedicle screws in patients undergoing spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Pedicle screws are commonly used for spinal procedures for fusion stability, which is particularly important in osteoporotic patients, who are at an increased risk of requiring revision procedures.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare clinical effectiveness of conventional pedicle screws (CPS) vs fenestrated pedicle screws (FPS) in patients undergoing spinal surgery. Primary outcomes included screw loosening, revision surgeries (involving an implant) and reoperations (not involving intervention on an implant) in patients treated with CPS vs FPS, sub-stratified by with and without osteoporosis. Secondary outcomes included changes in pain scores. Forty-eight studies with 8,302 patients were included, with 1,565 (19.18%) treated with FPS and 6,710 (80.82%) treated with CPS. FPS was associated with a lower risk of screw loosening (p = 0.001) vs CPS. In the general population, there was a non-significant trend of lower revision rate, but no difference in reoperation rate, between patients treated with FPS vs CPS. In osteoporotic patients, revision rates were significantly lower for FPS vs CPS (p = 0.009).

EXPERT OPINION

This review suggests that FPS are effective for surgical fixation and reduce rates of screw loosening, and in osteoporotic patients, revision surgeries, compared to CPS.

[The safety of TiRobot-guided percutaneous transpedicular screw implantation]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of TiRobot-guided percutaneous transpedicular screw implantation.

METHODS

The medical records of 158 patients with thoracolumbar fractures and lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent percutaneous transpedicular screw implantation were retrospectively analyzed between January 2018 and December 2020. The patients were divided into trial group (TiRobot-guided screw implantation, 86 cases) and control group (fluoroscopy-guided screw implantation, 72 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, pathology, lesion segment, and the average number of screw implantation per case ( P>0.05). The operation time, fluoroscopic dose, fluoroscopic time, and fluoroscopic frequency were compared between the two groups. One day postoperatively, the convergence angle was measured and the penetration of the pedicle cortex was evaluated according to Gertzbein-Robbins classification standard.

RESULTS

The operation time, fluoroscopic dose, fluoroscopic time, and fluoroscopic frequency of the trial group were significantly lesser than those of control group ( P<0.05). One day postoperatively, the convergence angle of trial group was (21.10±4.08)°, which was significantly larger than control group (19.17±3.48)° ( t=6.810, P=0.000). According to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification standard, 446 pedicle screws were implanted in trial group, trajectories were grade A in 377 screws, grade B in 46 screws, grade C in 23 screws, and the accuracy of screw implantation was 94.8%; 380 pedicle screws were implanted in control group, trajectories were grade A in 283 screws, grade B in 45 screws, grade C in 44 screws, grade D in 6 screws, grade E in 2 screws, and the accuracy of screw implantation was 86.3%. There was significant difference in the accuracy of screw implantation between the two groups ( χ 2=25.950, P=0.000).

CONCLUSION

Compared with traditional percutaneous transpedicular screw implantation, TiRobot-guided percutaneous transpedicular screw implantation can improve the accuracy of screw implantation, reduce radiation exposure, and improve surgical safety, which has a good application prospect.

Robot-Assisted Image-Guided Interventions

Image guidance is a common methodology of minimally invasive procedures. Depending on the type of intervention, various imaging modalities are available. Common imaging modalities are computed tomography, magnetic resonance tomography, and ultrasound. Robotic systems have been developed to enable and improve the procedures using these imaging techniques. Spatial and technological constraints limit the development of versatile robotic systems. This paper offers a brief overview of the developments of robotic systems for image-guided interventions since 2015 and includes samples of our current research in this field.

Do robot-related complications influence 1 year reoperations and other clinical outcomes after robot-assisted lumbar arthrodesis? A multicenter assessment of 320 patients

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted platforms in spine surgery have rapidly developed into an attractive technology for both the surgeon and patient. Although current literature is promising, more clinical data is needed. The purpose of this paper is to determine the effect of robot-related complications on clinical outcomes METHODS: This multicenter study included adult (≥18 years old) patients who underwent robot-assisted lumbar fusion surgery from 2012-2019. The minimum follow-up was 1 year after surgery. Both bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine if robot-related factors were associated with reoperation within 1 year after primary surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 320 patients were included in this study. The mean (standard deviation) Charlson Comorbidity Index was 1.2 (1.2) and 52.5% of patients were female. Intraoperative robot complications occurred in 3.4% of patients and included intraoperative exchange of screw (0.9%), robot abandonment (2.5%), and return to the operating room for screw exchange (1.3%). The 1-year reoperation rate was 4.4%. Robot factors, including robot time per screw, open vs. percutaneous, and robot system, were not statistically different between those who required revision surgery and those who did not (P>0.05). Patients with robot complications were more likely to have prolonged length of hospital stay and blood transfusion, but were not at higher risk for 1-year reoperations. The most common reasons for reoperation were wound complications (2.2%) and persistent symptoms due to inadequate decompression (1.5%). In the multivariate analysis, robot related factors and complications were not independent risk factors for 1-year reoperations.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest multicenter study to focus on robot-assisted lumbar fusion outcomes. Our findings demonstrate that 1-year reoperation rates are low and do not appear to be influenced by robot-related factors and complications; however, robot-related complications may increase the risk for greater blood loss requiring a blood transfusion and longer length of stay.

Application of Spinal Robotic Navigation Technology to Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Treatment of Spinal Fractures: A Clinical, Non-Randomized, Controlled Study

Objective

To introduce a new robotic navigation system that assists pedicle screw implantation and verify the accuracy and stability of the system.

Methods

Pedicle screw placements were performed on the thoracic vertebrae (T)9–Lumbar vertebrae (L)5 thoracolumbar vertebrae of cadavers using robotic guidance. The operative duration, puncture success, correction, and correction time were assessed. Additionally, a total of 30 thoracolumbar fractures from September 2017 until June 2019 were included in a clinical study. Two groups were evaluated: the robotic guidance group and freehand group. Both sexes were evaluated. Mean ages were 47.0 and 49.1 years, respectively, in the robotic and freehand groups. Inclusion criteria was age >18 years and a thoracolumbar fracture. Intervention was the operative treatment of thoracolumbar fractures. Outcome parameters were the operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and fluoroscopic data. The accuracy of the pedicle screw placement and screw penetration rate of the two groups were compared using intraoperative fluoroscopic axial images.

Results

The success rate for 108 one‐time nail placements in cadavers was 88% and two‐time nail placement was 100%. Vertebral punctures at L5 took the longest to perform and achieve correction. Clinically, there were no significant differences in patients' sex, body mass index, age distribution, or intraoperative bleeding between the groups. The average X‐ray exposure time for patients and operators were 37.69 ± 9.24 s and 0 s in the robotic group (significantly lower than in the freehand group: 81.24 ± 6.97 s vs 56.29 ± 7.93 s, respectively). Success rates for one‐time screw placements were 98.64 and 88.46% in the robotic and freehand groups, respectively, which is significant. Screw penetration rates (1.36% vs 11.54%, robotic vs freehand), were significantly different.

Conclusions

The robotic system improved the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw internal fixation and reduced patients' and operators' intraoperative radiation exposure.

Robot-assisted technique vs conventional freehand technique in spine surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of robot-assisted techniques versus conventional freehand techniques in terms of the accuracy of pedicle screw placement remains conflicting. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate this relationship.

METHODS

A systematic literature search up to July 2020 was performed and 15 studies were detected with 6041 pedicle screw placements with 2748 of them were using robot-assisted techniques and 3293 were conventional freehand techniques. They reported relationships between robot-assisted techniques and conventional freehand techniques in pedicle screw placement. Odds ratio (OR) or Mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated comparing the robot-assisted techniques to conventional freehand techniques in pedicle screw placement risks using the dichotomous and continuous method with a random or fixed-effect model.

RESULTS

Robot-assisted techniques had a significantly higher screw position grade A in Gertzbein-Robbins classification of the screw placement accuracy (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.66-3.54, P < .001); shorter postoperative stay (MD, -0.67; 95% CI, -1.16 to -0.19, P < .001); lower intraoperative blood loss (MD, -91.64; 95% CI, -152.44 to -30.83, P = .003); fewer intraoperative radiation dose (MD, -23.52; 95% CI, -40.12 to -6.0.93, P = .005); and low proximal facet violations (MD, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03-0.20, P < .001) compared with conventional freehand techniques. However, no significant difference was found between robot-assisted techniques and conventional freehand techniques in surgical time (OR, 11.71; 95% CI, 03.27-26.70, P = .13); visual analogue scale scores (MD, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.54 to 0.23, P = .44); and Oswestry disability index scores (MD, 0.21; 95% CI, -5.09-5.51, P = .94).

CONCLUSIONS

The extent of the improvement with robot-assisted techniques in screw position grade A in Gertzbein-Robbins classification of the screw placement accuracy, postoperative stay, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative radiation dose, and proximal facet violations was significantly better than conventional freehand techniques. This relationship forces us to recommend robot-assisted techniques for pedicle screw placement to avoid any possible negative postoperative results.

Research quality and transparency, outcome measurement and evidence for safety and effectiveness in robot-assisted surgery: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has potential panspecialty surgical benefits. High-quality evidence for widespread implementation is lacking. This systematic review aimed to assess the RAS evidence base for the quality of randomized evidence on safety and effectiveness, specialty 'clustering', and outcomes for RAS research.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken according to PRISMA guidelines. All pathologies and procedures utilizing RAS were included. Studies were limited to RCTs, the English language and publication within the last decade. The main outcomes selected for the review design were safety and efficacy, and study purpose. Secondary outcomes were study characteristics, funding and governance.

RESULTS

Searches identified 7142 titles, from which 183 RCTs were identified for data extraction. The commonest specialty was urology (35·0 per cent). There were just 76 unique study populations, indicating significant overlap of publications; 103 principal studies were assessed further. Only 64·1 per cent of studies reported a primary outcome measure, with 29·1 per cent matching their registration/protocol. Safety was assessed in 68·9 per cent of trials; operative complications were the commonest measure. Forty-eight per cent of trials reported no significant difference in safety between RAS and comparator, and 11 per cent reported RAS to be superior. Efficacy or effectiveness was assessed in 80·6 per cent of trials; 43 per cent of trials showed no difference between RAS and comparator, and 24 per cent reported that RAS was superior. Funding was declared in 47·6 per cent of trials.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for RAS is of limited quality and variable transparency in reporting. No patterns of harm to patients were identified. RAS has potential to be beneficial, but requires continued high-quality evaluation.

Novel C-arm based planning spine surgery robot proved in a porcine model and quantitative accuracy assessment methodology

BACKGROUND

We assessed pedicle screw accuracy utilizing a novel navigation-based spine surgery robotic system by comparing planned pathways with placed pathways in a porcine model.

METHODS

We placed three mini screws per vertebra for accuracy evaluation and used a reference frame for registration in four pigs (46 screws in 23 vertebrae). We planned screw paths and performed screw insertion under robot guidance. Using C-arm and CT images, we evaluated accuracy by comparing the 3D distance of the placed screw head/tip from the planned screw head/tip and 3D angular offset.

RESULTS

Mean registration deviation between the preoperative 3D space (C-arm) and postoperative CT scans was 0.475 ± 0.119 mm. The average offset from preoperative plan to final placement was 4.8 ± 2.0 mm from the head (tail), 5.3 ± 2.3 mm from the tip and 3.9 ± 2.4 degrees of angulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our spine surgery robot showed good accuracy in executing an intended planned trajectory and screw path. This faster and more accurate robotic system will be applied in future studies, first in cadavers and subsequently in the clinical field.

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.

The impact of robot-assisted spine surgeries on clinical outcomes: A systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Medical robotics has enabled a significant advancement in the field of modern spine surgery, especially in pedicle screw fixation. A plethora of studies focused on the accuracy of pedicle fixation in robotic-assisted (RA) technology. However, it is not clear whether RA techniques can improve patients' clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We retrieved relevant studies that compare the differences between RA and freehand (FH) techniques in spine surgeries from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. The perioperative outcomes of this technology were measured with parameters including radiation exposure, operative time, the length of hospital stay, complication rates and revision rates. Two reviewers independently reviewed the studies in our sample, assessed their validity and extracted relevant data.

RESULTS

Our search resulted in a sample of 23 eligible studies, which involved 1247 patients (5042 pedicle screws) in the RA group and 1273 patients (4830 pedicle screws) in the FH group. With regard to the radiation exposure, the fluoroscopy time was less in surgeries assisted by Mazor robots (standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.96, 95% CI = -1.60 to -0.31) but more in Tianji robots (SMD = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.17 to 1.66) and ROSA robots (SMD = 2.57, 95% CI = 2.01 to 3.13). For radiation dose, a decrease was observed in Tianji robots (SMD = -1.59, 95% CI = -2.13 to -1.05). In the lumbar subgroup, the use of robots increased the operative time (SMD = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.86). In the degenerative diseases (DG) group, there was a significant decrease in the length of hospital stay when robots were introduced (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = -0.48 to -0.12). While in the DF (deformity) and DG group, a significant increase was found (SMD = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.32). The complication (OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.26 to 0.66) and the revision rates (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.60) showed a significant decrease in the RA group compared to the conventional FH group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that RA spine surgeries would result in fewer complications, a lower revision rate and shorter length of hospital stay. As the technology continues to evolve, we may expect more applications of robotic systems in spine surgeries.

[Robot-guided percutaneous kyphoplasty in treatment of multi-segmental osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture]

Objective

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-guided percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) in treatment of multi-segmental thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF).

Methods

A clinical data of 63 cases with multi-segmental thoracolumbar OVCF without neurologic deficit treated with PKP between October 2017 and February 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into robot-guided group (33 cases) and traditional fluoroscopy group (30 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, fracture segment, bone mineral density, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, midline vertebral height, and Cobb angle between the two groups ( P>0.05). The time to establish the tunnel, the times of fluoroscopy, the dose of fluoroscopy, the deviation of puncture, the distribution of bone cement, the leakage of bone cement, the puncture angle, and the postoperative VAS score, midline vertebral height, and Cobb angle were recorded and compared.

Results

The patients in two groups were followed up 11-13 months (mean, 12 months). Compared with traditional fluoroscopy group, the time to establish the tunnel, the times and dose of fluoroscopy in robot-guided group were significantly lower, the deviation of puncture was slighter, the distribution of bone cement was better, and the puncture angle was larger, the differences between the two groups were significant ( P<0.05). There were 8 segments (9.3%, 8/86) of bone leakage in robot-guided group and 17 segments (22.6%, 17/75) in traditional fluoroscopy group, the difference between the two groups was significant ( χ ²=5.455, P=0.020). There was no significant difference in VAS score, the midline vertebral height, and Cobb angle between the two groups at 2 days after operation and last follow-up ( P>0.05).

Conclusion

Robot-guided PKP in treatment of multi-segmental thoracolumbar OVCF can shorten the operation time, improve the accuracy of puncture, reduce the times and dose of fluoroscopy, reduce the leakage of bone cement, and achieve better cement distribution.

Augmented reality and artificial intelligence-assisted surgical navigation: Technique and cadaveric feasibility study

Purpose

Augmented reality-based image overlay of virtual bony spine anatomy can be projected onto real spinal anatomy using computer tomography-generated DICOM images acquired intraoperatively. The aim of the study was to develop a technique and assess the accuracy and feasibility of lumbar vertebrae pedicle instrumentation using augmented reality-assisted surgical navigation.

Subjects and Methods

An augmented reality and artificial intelligence (ARAI)-assisted surgical navigation system was developed. The system consists of a display system which hovers over the surgical field and projects three-dimensional (3D) medical images corresponding with the patient's anatomy. The system was registered to the cadaveric spine using an optical tracker and arrays with reflective markers. The virtual image overlay from the ARAI system was compared to 3D generated images from intraoperative scans and used to percutaneously navigate a probe to the cortex at the corresponding pedicle starting point. Intraoperative scan was used to confirm the probe position. Virtual probe placement was compared to the actual probe position in the bone to determine the accuracy of the navigation system.

Results

Four cadaveric thoracolumbar spines were used. The navigated probes were correctly placed in all attempted levels (n = 24 levels), defined as Zdichavsky type 1a, Ravi type I, and Gertzbein type 0. The virtual overlay image corresponded to the 3D generated image in all the tested levels.

Conclusions

The ARAI surgical navigation system correctly and accurately identified the starting points at all the attempted levels. The virtual anatomy image overlay precisely corresponded to the actual anatomy in all the tested scenarios. This technology may lead more uniform outcomes between surgeons and decrease minimally invasive spine surgery learning curves.

Robotic navigation during spine surgery

Introduction: Potential complications associated with screw malposition may result in neurological deficits or vascular injuries. Spine surgery has significantly developed under the assistance of technological progress. The advantages of applying robotic technology in spine surgery include the possibility of improving screw accuracy, reducing complications, decreasing fluoroscopy use.Areas covered: We critically evaluated the current literature on the radiographic and clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted spine surgery, including accuracy, radiation exposure, operative time, and complication rates.Expert opinion: Robotic-assisted spine surgery shows promising results and has the potentials for further investigations. The robot-assisted spine surgery is appeared to be more accurate in pedicle screw placement than the free-hand technique. In general, the robot-assisted technique is associated with shorter radiation exposure time but longer operative time than free-hand technique. For higher accuracy of robotic-assisted spine surgery, technical advancement and high-quality researches are needed. Artificial intelligent technology, decompression function, and higher accuracy are the directions for the development of robotic-assisted spine surgery.

Navigated robotic assistance results in improved screw accuracy and positive clinical outcomes: an evaluation of the first 54 cases

Computer-aided navigation and robotic guidance systems have become widespread in their utilization for spine surgery. A recent innovation combines these two advances, which theoretically provides accuracy in spinal screw placement. This study describes the cortical and pedicle screw accuracy for the first 54 cases where navigated robotic assistance was used in a surgical setting. This is a retrospective chart review of the initial 54 patients undergoing spine surgery with pedicle and cortical screws using robotic guidance with navigation. A computed tomography (CT)-based Gertzbein and Robbins System (GRS) was used to classify pedicle screw accuracy. Screw tip, tail, and angulation offsets were measured using image overlay analysis. Screw malposition, reposition, and return to operating room rates were collected. 1 of the first 54 cases was a revision surgery and was excluded from the study. Ten screws were placed without the robot due to surgeon discretion and were excluded for the data analysis of 292 screws. Only 0.68% (2/292) of the robot-assisted screws was repositioned based on surgeon discretion. Based on the GRS CT-based grading, 98.3% (287/292) were graded A or B, 1.0% (3/292) screws were graded C, and only 0.7% (2/292) screws was graded D. The average offset from preoperative plan to actual final placement was 1.9 mm from the tip, 2.3 mm from the tail, and 2.8° of angulation. In the first 53 cases, 292 screws placed with navigated robotic assistance resulted in a high level of accuracy (98.3%), adequate screw offsets from planned trajectory, and zero complications.