Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement: Evaluation of Accuracy of the First 100 Screws and Comparison with Cohort of Fluoroscopy-guided Screws

Advancing robot-guided techniques in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spine surgery is a crucial intervention for addressing spinal injuries or conditions affecting the spine, often involving lumbar fusion through pedicle screw (PS) insertion. The precision of PS placement is pivotal in orthopedic surgery. This systematic review compares the accuracy of robot-guided (RG) surgery with free-hand fluoroscopy-guided (FFG), free-hand without fluoroscopy-guided (FHG), and computed tomography image-guided (CTG) techniques for PS insertion.

METHODS

A systematic search of various databases from 1 January 2013 to 30 December 2023 was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcomes, including PS insertion accuracy and breach rate, were analyzed using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

The overall accuracy of PS insertion using RG, based on 37 studies involving 3,837 patients and 22,117 PS, is 97.9%, with a breach rate of 0.021. RG demonstrated superior accuracy compared to FHG and CTG, with breach rates of 3.4 and 0.015 respectively for RG versus FHG, and 3.8 and 0.026 for RG versus CTG. Additionally, RG was associated with reduced mean estimated blood loss compared to CTG, indicating improved safety.

CONCLUSIONS

The RG is associated with enhanced accuracy of PS insertion and reduced breach rates over other methods. However, additional randomized controlled trials comparing these modalities are needed for further validation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42023483997.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Robotic systems have emerged as a significant advancement in the field of spine surgery. They offer improved accuracy in pedicle screw placement and reduce intraoperative complications, hospital length of stay, blood loss, and radiation exposure. As the use of robotics in spine surgery continues to grow, it becomes imperative to understand common errors and challenges associated with this new and promising technology. Although the reported accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is very high, the current literature does not capture near misses or incidental procedural errors that might have been managed during surgery or did not alter treatment of patients. We evaluated errors that occur during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion and identify best practices to minimize their occurrence.

METHODS

In this systematic review, we characterized 3 types of errors encountered during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion-registration errors, skiving, and interference errors-that have been reported in the literature.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 13 relevant studies reporting robot-assisted screw errors. Nine studies reported registration errors, with 60% of failed screws in those studies caused by registration issues. Seven studies highlighted skiving errors; 26.8% of the failed screws in those studies were caused by skiving. Finally, interference errors were reported in 4 studies, making up 19.5% of failed screws.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of these findings, we suggest best practices-including close attention to preoperative planning, patient positioning, image registration, and equipment selection-to minimize the occurrence of these errors. Awareness of how errors occur may increase the safety of this technology.

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

STUDY DESIGN

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is associated with greater accuracy, reduced radiation, less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and fewer complications than freehand screw placement. However, it can be associated with longer operative times and an extended training period. We report the initial experience of a surgeon using a robot system at an academic medical center.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing robot-assisted pedicle screw placement at a single tertiary care institution by 1 surgeon from 10/2017 to 05/2022. Linear regression, analysis of variance, and cumulative sum analysis were used to evaluate operative time learning curves. Operative time subanalyses for surgery indication, number of levels, and experience level were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 234 cases were analyzed. A significant 0.19-minute decrease in operative time per case was observed (r = 0.14, P = .03). After 234 operations, this translates to a reduction in 44.5 minutes from the first to last case. A linear relationship was observed between case number and operative time in patients with spondylolisthesis (-0.63 minutes/case, r = 0.41, P < .001), 2-level involvement (-0.35 minutes/case, r = 0.19, P = .05), and 4-or-more-level involvement (-1.29 minutes/case, r = 0.24, P = .05). This resulted in reductions in operative time ranging from 39 minutes to 1.5 hours. Continued reductions in operative time were observed across the learning, experienced, and expert phases, which had mean operative times of 214, 197, and 146 minutes, respectively ( P < .001). General proficiency in robot-assisted surgery was observed after the 20th case. However, 67 cases were required to reach mastery, defined as the inflection point of the cumulative sum curve.

CONCLUSION

This study documents the long-term learning curve of a fellowship-trained spine neurosurgeon. Operative time significantly decreased with more experience. Although gaining comfort with robotic systems may be challenging or require additional training, it can benefit surgeons and patients alike with continued reductions in operative time.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Cirq Robotic Assistance for Thoracolumbar Pedicle Screw Placement: Overcoming the Disadvantages of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Various minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) techniques have been developed with the goal of reducing approach-related soft-tissue trauma and its associated complications. However, there is still a debate on some of the potential drawbacks of MISS techniques, such as their longer operating times and increased intraoperative radiation. A solution to these disadvantages could be the implementation of new technologies, such as computer-assisted navigation (CAN) and surgical robotics. We compare the standard fluoroscopy MISS technique with our experience with time per screw and X-ray exposure for pedicle screw placement using the Brainlab Cirq passive robotic arm assistance coupled with the Brainlab Curve navigation system.

METHODS

In the Cirq robot-assisted group (Group I), 109 screws were placed in 24 prospectively analyzed patients. In the fluoroscopy-guided group, 108 screws inserted into 20 consecutive patients were analyzed retrospectively (Group II). The duration of surgery, the time to place one screw, the X-ray exposition, and the pedicle screw accuracy for each patient were recorded and reviewed.

RESULTS

In total, 217 screws were analyzed. The treated levels ranged from T10 to S1. In Group I, 104 screws were grade A (95.4%) and five were grade B (4.6%). In Group II, 96 screws were grade A (88.89%); ten were grade B (9.26%); one was grade C (0.93%), and one was grade D (0.93%). While the screws placed by using the Cirq system were more accurate overall, there was no statistical significance when the two groups were compared, p = 0.3724. There was no significant difference in radiation exposure between the two groups, p = 0.5482; however the radiation exposure for the surgeon was very limited with the Cirq system. There was a significant reduction in the operation length (p = 0.0183) and the time per screw (p < 0.0001) for Group I.

CONCLUSIONS

The CAN systems and emerging robotic platforms have the potential to diminish the main disadvantages of MISS techniques-longer operation times and X-ray exposure, at least for the surgical team.

Reduction in Radiation Exposure in Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Placement Using a Tubular Retractor: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement is a minimally invasive spinal procedure that has been rapidly adopted over the last decade. However, PPS placement has elicited fear of increased radiation exposure from some surgeons, medical staff, and patients. This is because PPS placement is performed using a K-wire, and the operator must perform K-wire insertion into the pedicle under fluoroscopy. In order to prevent erroneous insertion, there are many occasions when direct insertion is required during radiation exposure, and the amount of radiation exposure to hands and fingers in particular increases. Although these problems are being addressed by navigation systems, these systems are still expensive and not widely available. Attempts have been made to address this situation using instrumentation commonly used in spinal surgery. First, it was considered to visualize anatomical bone markers using a tubular retractor and a microscope. In addition, the use of a self-drilling pin was adopted to locate the pedicle in a narrower field of view. Based on these considerations, a minimally invasive and highly accurate pedicle screw placement technique was developed while avoiding direct radiation exposure. This study evaluated radiation exposure and accuracy of pedicle screw placement using this new procedure in one-level, minimally invasive, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively to review pedicle screw placement in single-level MIS TLIFs using a tubular retractor under a microscope. The total fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and screw placement accuracy were reviewed. Extension of operating time was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients underwent single-level MIS TLIFs, with placement of 96 pedicle screws. There were 15 females and 9 males, with an average age of 64.8 years and a mean body mass index of 25.5 kg/m². The mean operating time was 201.8 min. The mean fluoroscopic time was 26.8 s. The mean radiation dose of the area dose product was 0.0706 mGy∗m². The mean radiation dose of air kerma was 6.0 mGy. The mean radiation dose of the entrance skin dose was 11.31 mGy. Postoperative computed tomography scans demonstrated 93 pedicle screws confined to the pedicle (97%) and three pedicle screw breaches (3.2%; two lateral, one medial). A patient with screw deviation of the medial pedicle wall developed right-foot numbness necessitating reoperation. There were no complications after reoperation. The average added time with this combined procedure was 39 min (range 16-69 min) per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel pedicle screw insertion technique compares favorably with other reports in terms of radiation exposure reduction and accuracy and is also useful from the viewpoint of avoiding direct radiation exposure to hands and fingers. It is economical because it uses existing spinal surgical instrumentation.

Learning curves in robotic neurosurgery: a systematic review

The transition to performing procedures robotically generally entails a period of adjustment known as a learning curve as the surgeon develops a familiarity with the technology. However, no study has comprehensively examined robotic learning curves across the field of neurosurgery. We conducted a systematic review to characterize the scope of literature on robotic learning curves in neurosurgery, assess operative parameters that may involve a learning curve, and delineate areas for future investigation. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched. Following deduplication, articles were screened by title and abstract for relevance. Remaining articles were screened via full text for final inclusion. Bibliographic and learning curve data were extracted. Of 746 resultant articles, 32 articles describing 3074 patients were included, of which 23 (71.9%) examined spine, 4 (12.5%) pediatric, 4 (12.5%) functional, and 1 (3.1%) general neurosurgery. The parameters assessed for learning curves were heterogeneous. In total, 8 (57.1%) of 14 studies found reduced operative time with increased cases, while the remainder demonstrated no learning curve. Six (60.0%) of 10 studies reported reduced operative time per component with increased cases, while the remainder indicated no learning curve. Radiation time, radiation time per component, robot time, registration time, setup time, and radiation dose were assessed by ≤ 4 studies each, with 0-66.7% of studies demonstrated a learning curve. Four (44.4%) of 9 studies on accuracy showed improvement over time, while the others indicated no improvement over time. The number of cases required to reverse the learning curve ranged from 3 to 75. Learning curves are common in robotic neurosurgery. However, existing studies demonstrate high heterogeneity in assessed parameters and the number of cases that comprise the learning curve. Future studies should seek to develop strategies to reduce the number of cases required to reach the learning curve.

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.

Assessing the accuracy of a new 3D2D registration algorithm based on a non-invasive skin marker model for navigated spine surgery

Purpose

We assessed the accuracy of a new 3D2D registration algorithm to be used for navigated spine surgery and explored anatomical and radiologic parameters affecting the registration accuracy. Compared to existing 3D2D registration algorithms, the algorithm does not need bone-mounted or table-mounted instruments for registration. Neither does the intraoperative imaging device have to be tracked or calibrated.

Methods

The rigid registration algorithm required imaging data (a pre-existing CT scan (3D) and two angulated fluoroscopic images (2D)) to register positions of vertebrae in 3D and is based on non-invasive skin markers. The algorithm registered five adjacent vertebrae and was tested in the thoracic and lumbar spine from three human cadaveric specimens. The registration accuracy was calculated for each registered vertebra and measured with the target registration error (TRE) in millimeters. We used multivariable analysis to identify parameters independently affecting the algorithm’s accuracy such as the angulation between the two fluoroscopic images (between 40° and 90°), the detector-skin distance, the number of skin markers applied, and waist circumference.

Results

The algorithm registered 780 vertebrae with a median TRE of 0.51 mm [interquartile range 0.32–0.73 mm] and a maximum TRE of 2.06 mm. The TRE was most affected by the angulation between the two fluoroscopic images obtained (p < 0.001): larger angulations resulted in higher accuracy. The algorithm was more accurate in thoracic vertebrae (p = 0.004) and in the specimen with the smallest waist circumference (p = 0.003). The algorithm registered all five adjacent vertebrae with similar accuracy.

Conclusion

We studied the accuracy of a new 3D2D registration algorithm based on non-invasive skin markers. The algorithm registered five adjacent vertebrae with similar accuracy in the thoracic and lumbar spine and showed a maximum target registration error of approximately 2 mm. To further evaluate its potential for navigated spine surgery, the algorithm may now be integrated into a complete navigation system.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11548-022-02733-w.

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.

Lateral versus prone robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement: a CT-based comparative assessment of accuracy

OBJECTIVE

Single-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SP-LLIF) has recently gained significant popularity due to increased operative efficiency, but it remains technically challenging. Robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw (RA-PPS) placement can facilitate screw placement in the lateral position. The authors have reported their initial experience with SP-LLIF with RA-PPS placement in the lateral position, and they have compared this accuracy with that of RA-PPS placement in the prone position.

METHODS

The authors reviewed prospectively collected data from their first 100 lateral-position RA-PPSs. The authors graded screw accuracy on CT and compared it to the accuracy of all prone-position RA-PPS procedures during the same time period. The authors analyzed the effect of several demographic and perioperative metrics, as a whole and specifically for lateral-position RA-PPS placement.

RESULTS

The authors placed 99 lateral-position RA-PPSs by using the ExcelsiusGPS robotic platform in the first 18 consecutive patients who underwent SP-LLIF with postoperative CT imaging; these patients were compared with 346 prone-position RA-PPSs that were placed in the first consecutive 64 patients during the same time period. All screws were placed at L1 to S1. Overall, the lateral group had 14 breaches (14.1%) and the prone group had 25 breaches (7.2%) (p = 0.032). The lateral group had 5 breaches (5.1%) greater than 2 mm (grade C or worse), and the prone group had 4 (1.2%) (p = 0.015). The operative level had an effect on the breach rate, with breach rates (grade C or worse) of 7.1% at L3 and 2.8% at L4. Most breaches were grade B (< 2 mm) and lateral, and no breach had clinical sequelae or required revision. Within the lateral group, multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that BMI and number of levels affected accuracy, but the side that was positioned up or down did not.

CONCLUSIONS

RA-PPSs can improve the feasibility of SP-LLIF. Spine surgeons should be cautious and selective with this technique owing to decreased accuracy in the lateral position, particularly in obese patients. Further studies should compare SP-LLIF techniques performed while the patient is in the prone and lateral positions.

Computer-aided automatic planning and biomechanical analysis of a novel arc screw for pelvic fracture internal fixation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The sacroiliac joint screw is a common fixation method for pelvic posterior ring fractures. The complex anatomical structure around the pelvis makes it impossible to find a suitable fixed path, which increases the difficulty of surgical operation. In this paper, we propose an automatic planning algorithm based on a computer-aided internal arc fixation channel for pelvic fractures for the first time.

METHODS

A channel generation algorithm based on seed derived points was designed, and the optimal channel was selected by scoring rules based on 3D erode algorithm for the generated channel. The biomechanical properties of the internal arc fixation screw and traditional internal straight fixation screw in three postures were compared using biomechanical finite element analysis.

RESULTS

The proposed algorithm verified the existence of a more adaptable internal arc fixation channel and can quantitatively plan a relatively optimal constant-curvature internal arc fixation channel in pelvises of ten adults. Significantly high stresses concentrated around the interaction region between the screws and bone may increase the risk of bone fractures and screw loosening in the long term. The experimental results show that the internal arc fixation screw has better strain and deformation performance than the internal straight fixation screw.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel arc internal fixation method for pelvic fractures was proposed to improve the safety and stability of screw fixation of pelvic fracture. The nonparametric test proved that the sacroiliac dislocation model repaired by internal arc fixation screw was significantly different from that repaired by internal straight fixation screw. The computer-aided automatic planning algorithm provides the possibility of robot-assisted pelvic fracture fixation.

Ninety-day complication, revision, and readmission rates for current-generation robot-assisted thoracolumbar spinal fusion surgery: results of a multicenter case series

OBJECTIVE

Robotics is a major area for research and development in spine surgery. The high accuracy of robot-assisted placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws is documented in the literature. The authors present the largest case series to date evaluating 90-day complication, revision, and readmission rates for robot-assisted spine surgery using the current generation of robotic guidance systems.

METHODS

An analysis of a retrospective, multicenter database of open and minimally invasive thoracolumbar instrumented fusion surgeries using the Mazor X or Mazor X Stealth Edition robotic guidance systems was performed. Patients 18 years of age or older and undergoing primary or revision surgery for degenerative spinal conditions were included. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate rates of malpositioned screws requiring revision, as well as overall complication, revision, and readmission rates within 90 days.

RESULTS

In total, 799 surgical cases (Mazor X: 48.81%; Mazor X Stealth Edition: 51.19%) were evaluated, involving robot-assisted placement of 4838 pedicle screws. The overall intraoperative complication rate was 3.13%. No intraoperative implant-related complications were encountered. Postoperatively, 129 patients suffered a total of 146 complications by 90 days, representing an incidence of 16.1%. The rate of an unrecognized malpositioned screw resulting in a new postoperative radiculopathy requiring revision surgery was 0.63% (5 cases). Medical and pain-related complications unrelated to hardware placement accounted for the bulk of postoperative complications within 90 days. The overall surgical revision rate at 90 days was 6.63% with 7 implant-related revisions, representing an implant-related revision rate of 0.88%. The 90-day readmission rate was 7.13% with 2 implant-related readmissions, representing an implant-related readmission rate of 0.25% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this multicenter case series and literature review suggest current-generation robotic guidance systems are associated with low rates of intraoperative and postoperative implant-related complications, revisions, and readmissions at 90 days. Future outcomes-based studies are necessary to evaluate complication, revision, and readmission rates compared to conventional surgery.

Learning curves in robot-assisted spine surgery: a systematic review and proposal of application to residency curricula

OBJECTIVE

Spine robots have seen increased utilization over the past half decade with the introduction of multiple new systems. Market research expects this expansion to continue over the next half decade at an annual rate of 20%. However, because of the novelty of these devices, there is limited literature on their learning curves and how they should be integrated into residency curricula. With the present review, the authors aimed to address these two points.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published English-language literature on PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies describing the learning curve in spine robotics. Included articles described clinical results in patients using one of the following endpoints: operative time, screw placement time, fluoroscopy usage, and instrumentation accuracy. Systems examined included the Mazor series, the ExcelsiusGPS, and the TiRobot. Learning curves were reported in a qualitative synthesis, given as the mean improvement in the endpoint per case performed or screw placed where possible. All studies were level IV case series with a high risk of reporting bias.

RESULTS

Of 1579 unique articles, 97 underwent full-text review and 21 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria; 62 articles were excluded for not presenting primary data for one of the above-described endpoints. Of the 21 articles, 18 noted the presence of a learning curve in spine robots, which ranged from 3 to 30 cases or 15 to 62 screws. Only 12 articles performed regressions of one of the endpoints (most commonly operative time) as a function of screws placed or cases performed. Among these, increasing experience was associated with a 0.24- to 4.6-minute decrease in operative time per case performed. All but one series described the experience of attending surgeons, not residents.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies of learning curves with spine robots have found them to be present, with the most common threshold being 20 to 30 cases performed. Unfortunately, all available evidence is level IV data, limited to case series. Given the ability of residency to allow trainees to safely perform these cases under the supervision of experienced senior surgeons, it is argued that a curriculum should be developed for senior-level residents specializing in spine comprising a minimum of 30 performed cases.

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.

Robotics and Spine Surgery: Lessons From the Personal Computer and Industrial Revolutions

Over the past decade, several review articles have evaluated the techniques and outcomes of robotics vs traditional methods in spine surgery. Recently, robot-assisted pedicle screw placement has emerged, representing an important milestone in the evolution of spine surgery. In the present article, the authors aim to provide the historical context regarding the use and growth of spinal robotics through the lens of the Industrial Revolution and the personal computer revolution. While the former provides insight into the current implications of robotics in spine surgery, the latter predicts future steps in this arena.

Intraoperative computed tomography-guided navigation versus fluoroscopy for single-position surgery after lateral lumbar interbody fusion

There are no reports comparing fluoroscopy and intraoperative computed tomography (CT) navigation in lateral single-position surgery (SPS) in terms of surgical outcomes or implant-related complications. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use radiological evaluation to compare the incidence of instrument-related complications in SPS of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) using fluoroscopy with that using CT navigation techniques. We evaluated 99 patients who underwent lateral SPS. Twenty-six patients had a percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) inserted under fluoroscopy (SPS-C group), and 73 patients had a PPS inserted under intraoperative CT navigation (SPS-O group). Average operation time was shorter in the SPS-C group than in the SPS-O group (88.4 ± 24.4 min versus 111.9 ± 35.3 min, respectively, P = 0.003). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in postoperative thigh symptoms or reoperation rate. The screw insertion angle of the SPS-C group was smaller than that of the SPS-O group, but there was no significant difference in the rate of screw misplacement (4.6% versus 3.4%, respectively, P = 0.556). By contrast, facet joint violation (FJV) was significantly lower in the SPS-O group than in the SPS-C group (8.4% versus 21.3%, respectively, P < 0.001). While fluoroscopy was superior to intraoperative CT navigation in terms of mean surgery time, there was no significant difference in the accuracy of PPS insertion between fluoroscopy and intraoperative CT navigation. The advantage of intraoperative CT navigation over fluoroscopy is that it significantly decreases the occurrence of FJV in SPS.

Cirq robotic arm-assisted transpedicular instrumentation with intraoperative navigation: technical note and case series with 714 thoracolumbar screws

The Cirq is a surgeon-controlled robotic arm that provides a new technique for accurately placing transpedicular screws. This report aims to present a technical report and our experience with this new robotic arm combined with intraoperative navigation. Technique and workflow using the Cirq robotic arm with intraoperative navigation is described. A retrospective review was conducted of all patients undergoing elective open thoracic/lumbar fusion surgery by a single surgeon in the first year of using the novel Cirq robotic arm. Descriptive analysis of patient and operative variables was performed. A total of 84 patients underwent placement of a total 714 transpedicular screws using the Cirq robotic arm. Most (69.1%) underwent 3-6 level fusion procedures. Mean operative time was 198 min total and 28 min when adjusted per screw. There was a learning curve with operative time per screw decreasing from 32 to 25 min from the first to second half of cases (p = 0.057). There were no intraoperative screw revisions and 2.4% (2/84) required instrumentation revision and return to the operating room. The Cirq robotic arm is seamlessly incorporated into the workflow of a transpedicular fusion. Our experience with over 700 pedicle screw placements using the Cirq robot demonstrates efficacy and safety although further comparative studies are needed.

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.

Robotic-Navigated Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement Has Less Facet Joint Violation Than Fluoroscopy-Guided Percutaneous Screws

OBJECTIVE

To directly compare robotic-versus fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement in thoracolumbar spine trauma with a focus on clinically acceptable pedicle screw accuracy and facet joint violation (FJV).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review assessed 37 trauma patients undergoing percutaneous thoracic and/or lumbar fixation. Postoperative computed tomography images were reviewed by authors blinded to surgical technique who assessed pedicle screw trajectory accuracy and FJV frequency.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients underwent placement of 143 PPS with robotic assistance (robot group), compared with 20 patients receiving 149 PPS using fluoroscopy assistance (control group). Overall, the robot cohort demonstrated decreased FJV frequency of 2.8% versus 14.8% in controls (P = 0.0003). When further stratified by level of surgery (i.e., upper thoracic, lower thoracic, lumbar spine), the robot group had FJV frequencies of 0%, 3.2%, and 3.7%, respectively, compared with 17.7% (P = 0.0209), 14.3% (P = 0.0455), and 11.9% (P = 0.2340) in controls. The robot group had 84.6% clinically acceptable screw trajectories compared with 81.9% in controls (P = 0.6388). Within the upper thoracic, lower thoracic, and lumbar regions, the robot group had acceptable screw trajectories of 66.7%, 87.1%, and 90.7%, respectively, compared with 58.8% (P = 0.6261), 91.1% (P = 0.5655), and 97.6% (P = 0.2263) in controls.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in clinically acceptable screw trajectory accuracy between robotic versus fluoroscopy-guided PPS placement. However, the robot cohort demonstrated a statistically significantly decreased FJV overall and specifically within the thoracic spine region. Use of robotic technology may improve radiographic outcomes for a subset of patients or spine surgeries.