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

Comparison of Rostral Facet Joint Violations in Robotic- and Navigation-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement for Adult Lumbar Spine Instrumentation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Facet joint violation by pedicle screws may lead to adjacent-segment disease and postoperative pain. Previous studies have reported the incidence of rostral facet joint violation using various pedicle screw insertion techniques. However, the incidence of facet joint violations with robotic guidance has not been determined.

PURPOSE

To investigate and compare the incidence of rostral facet joint violation by pedicle screws under robotic guidance and computerized tomography (CT) navigation guidance.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective Matched Cohort PATIENT SAMPLE: All patients who underwent robotic-assisted lumbar fusion at a major spine center up until 2023 were retrospectively identified and matched 1:3 to patients undergoing CT navigation guidance based by on age, sex, rostral vertebral level, and length of construct. Inclusion criteria consisted of age greater than 18 years, bilateral pedicle screw fixation, and presence of a postoperative CT scan of the lumbar spine or abdomen/pelvis at any point in the post-operative period.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Rostral facet joint violations METHODS: Descriptive statistics were used to compare cohorts: frequencies, chi-squared analysis for categorical variables, and t-test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 408 rostral pedicle screws were implanted in 204 patients (Robot: 102; Navigation: 306). Overall, 13 (12.3%) rostral facet joint violations were observed in the robot cohort and 75 (24.5%) in the navigation cohort (p=0.01). Specifically, fewer robotic violations were observed at the L2 (3.5% vs 32.1%, p=0.003) and L3 levels (3.9% vs. 18.1%, p=0.08) compared to navigation. No difference was observed at L4 and L5. Bilateral violations are significantly reduced with robotic approaches (5.3% vs. 14.4%, p=0.03). Lastly, more facet joint violations were observed during open approaches (robot: 18.8%, navigation: 27.3%) than percutaneous approaches (robot: 11.6%, navigation: 7.1%) in both groups (p<0.001). The rate of L4 facet violations was 18.8% in the robotic cohort and 27.3% in the navigation cohort. The rate of L5 facet violations was 31.3% in the robotic cohort and 29.2% in the navigation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of robotic assistance in lumbar pedicle screws significantly reduced the rate of rostral facet joint violations compared to navigation guidance at L2 and L3 levels, but not at L4 and L5, with facet violations approaching nearly one-third of the patients at L5 screws. Rostral facet violations can play a significant role in adjacent segment degeneration and disease. Technical factors and trajectory issues likely play a role and addressing these components should minimize unintended facet violation and proximal adding on.

Comparison of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trails and cohort studies

BACKGROUND

As an emerging technology in robot-assisted (RA) surgery, the potential benefits of its application in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) lack substantial support from current evidence.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate whether the RA TLIF is superior to FG TLIF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed studies comparing RA versus FG TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases through July 2022 by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL (EBSCO), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, VIP, and the Cochrane Library, as well as the references of published review articles. Both cohort studies (CSs) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Evaluation criteria included the accuracy of percutaneous pedicle screw placement, proximal facet joint violation (FJV), radiation exposure, duration of surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), and surgical revision. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias and ROBINS-I Tool. Random-effects models were used, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) was employed as the effect measure. We conducted subgroup analyses based on surgical type, the specific robot system used, and the study design. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, and the certainty of evidence was graded using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

Our search identified 539 articles, of which 21 met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that RA had 1.03-folds higher "clinically acceptable" accuracy than FG (RR: 1.0382, 95% CI: 1.0273-1.0493). And RA had 1.12-folds higher "perfect" accuracy than FG group (RR: 1.1167, 95% CI: 1.0726-1.1626). In the case of proximal FJV, our results indicate a 74% reduction in occurrences for patients undergoing RA pedicle screw placement compared to those in the FG group (RR: 0.2606, 95%CI: 0.2063- 0.3293). Seventeen CSs and two RCTs reported the duration of time. The results of CSs suggest that there is no significant difference between RA and FG group (SMD: 0.1111, 95%CI: -0.391-0.6131), but the results of RCTs suggest that the patients who underwent RA-TLIF need more surgery time than FG (SMD: 3.7213, 95%CI: 3.0756-4.3669). Sixteen CSs and two RCTs reported the EBL. The results suggest that the patients who underwent RA pedicle screw placement had fewer EBL than FG group (CSs: SMD: -1.9151, 95%CI: -3.1265-0.7036, RCTs: SMD: -5.9010, 95%CI: -8.7238-3.0782). For radiation exposure, the results of CSs suggest that there is no significant difference in radiation time between RA and FG group (SMD: -0.5256, 95%CI: -1.4357-0.3845), but the patients who underwent RA pedicle screw placement had fewer radiation dose than FG group (SMD: -2.2682, 95%CI: -3.1953-1.3411). And four CSs and one RCT reported the number of revision case. The results of CSs suggest that there is no significant difference in the number of revision case between RA and FG group (RR: 0.4087,95% CI 0.1592-1.0495). Our findings are limited by the residual heterogeneity of the included studies, which may limit the interpretation of the results.

CONCLUSION

In TLIF, RA technology exhibits enhanced precision in pedicle screw placement when compared to FG methods. This accuracy contributes to advantages such as the protection of adjacent facet joints and reductions in intraoperative radiation dosage and blood loss. However, the longer preoperative preparation time associated with RA procedures results in comparable surgical duration and radiation time to FG techniques. Presently, FG screw placement remains the predominant approach, with clinical surgeons possessing greater proficiency in its application. Consequently, the integration of RA into TLIF surgery may not be considered the optimal choice.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023441600.

Pedicle Screw-Associated Violation of the Adjacent Unfused Facet Joint: Clinical Outcomes and Fusion Rates

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of a prospective randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcome scores and fusion rates in patients with and without pedicle screw-associated facet joint violation (FJV) after a single-level lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Clinical outcomes data and computed tomography (CT) imaging were reviewed for 157 patients participating in a multicenter prospective trial. Post-operative CT scans at 12-months follow-up were examined for fusion status and FJV. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for leg and low back pain. Chi-square test of independence was used to compare proportions between groups on categorical measures. Two-sample t-test was used to identify differences in mean patient outcome scores. Logistic regression models were performed to determine association between FJV and fusion rates.

RESULTS

Of the 157 patients included, there were 18 (11.5%) with FJV (Group A) and 139 (88.5%) without FJV (Group B). Patients with FJV experienced less improvement in ODI (P = .004) and VAS back pain scores (P = .04) vs patients without FJV. There was no difference in mean VAS leg pain (P = .4997). The rate of fusion at 12-months for patients with FJV (27.8%) was lower compared to those without FJV (71.2%) (P = .0002). Patients with FJV were 76% less likely to have a successful fusion at 12-months.

CONCLUSION

Pedicle screw-associated violation of the adjacent unfused facet joint during single-level lumbar fusion is associated with less improvement in back pain, back pain-associated disability, and a lower fusion rate at 1-year after surgery.

Advancements in Robotic-Assisted Spine Surgery

Applications and workflows around spinal robotics have evolved since these systems were first introduced in 2004. Initially approved for lumbar pedicle screw placement, the scope of robotics has expanded to instrumentation across different regions. Additionally, precise navigation can aid in tumor resection or spinal lesion ablation. Robot-assisted surgery can improve accuracy while decreasing radiation exposure, length of hospital stay, complication, and revision rates. Disadvantages include increased operative time, dependence on preoperative imaging among others. The future of robotic spine surgery includes automated surgery, telerobotic surgery, and the inclusion of machine learning or artificial intelligence in preoperative planning.

Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted cortical bone trajectory screw instrumentation in spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Robot-assisted (RA) technology has been shown to be a safe aid in spine surgery, this meta-analysis aims to compare surgical parameters and clinical indexes between robot-assisted cortical bone trajectory (CBT) and fluoroscopy-assisted (FA) cortical bone trajectory in spinal surgery. We searched databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The study selection process was guided by the PICOS (Patient/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study Design) strategy. The risk of bias in non-randomized comparative studies was assessed using the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. We performed this meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark), and the level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Six articles involving 371 patients and 1535 screws were included in this meta-analysis. RA-CBT outperformed FA-CBT in terms of various parameters, such as accuracy of pedicle screw position (both Gertzbein-Robbins scale and Ding scale), avoidance of superior facet joint violation (FJV), and reduction of neurological injury. Our meta-analysis offered a thorough evaluation of the efficacy and safety of RA-CBT in spinal surgery. The findings revealed that RA-CBT produced statistically significant results in terms of pedicle screw position accuracy and superior facet joint violation prevention. In terms of surgical parameters and clinical indexes, future research and clinical practice should investigate the efficacy of RA-CBT further. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023466280).

Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Robot-assisted (RA) technology has been widely used in spine surgery. This analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of RA minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and fluoroscopy-assisted (FA) MIS-TLIF for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases (DLSD). PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were systematically searched, and the outcomes included surgical parameters [operation time, blood loss, number of fluoroscopic, accuracy of pedicle screw position, superior facet joint violation (FJV)], and clinical indexes (Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, complications). Eleven articles involving 1066 patients were included. RA group produced better results than the FA group in operation time (WMD = - 6.59; 95% CI - 12.79 to - 0.40; P = 0.04), blood loss (WMD = - 34.81; 95% CI - 50.55 to - 19.08; P < 0.0001), number of fluoroscopic (WMD = - 18.24; 95% CI - 30.63 to - 5.85; P = 0.004), accuracy of pedicle screw position: Grade A (OR = 3.16; 95% CI 2.36-4.23; P < 0.00001), Grade B (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54; P < 0.00001), Grade C (OR = 0.27; 95% CI 0.13-0.54; P = 0.0002), and Grade D (OR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.03-0.98; P = 0.05), FJV: Grade 0 (OR = 3.27; 95% CI 1.34-8.02; P = 0.010), Grade 1 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.16-0.38; P < 0.00001), Grade 2 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.12-0.51; P = 0.0002), and Grade 3 (OR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.07-0.93; P = 0.04). But no significant differences in VAS score, ODI, JOA score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, and complications. These results demonstrate a significant improvement in the intraoperative course of the RA technique. However, RA-MIS-TLIF has not yet demonstrated significant advantages in terms of postoperative symptom relief and functional improvement. Future research and clinical practice should further explore the efficacy of this technique to optimize outcomes and quality of life for patients with DLSD. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023454405).

Comparison of the efficacies of TINAVI robot-assisted surgery and conventional open surgery for Levine-Edward type IIA (postreduction) hangman fractures

The objective was to compare the clinical efficacy of percutaneous pedicle screw internal fixation with the aid of the TINAVI orthopaedic surgery robot with that of traditional open surgery for Levine-Edward type IIA (postreduction) hangman fractures and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TINAVI robot-assisted orthopaedic surgery procedure. The clinical data of 60 patients with Levine-Edward type IIA (postreduction) hangman fractures treated surgically from June 2015 to February 2022 were analysed retrospectively. Among these patients, 25 were treated with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation under TINAVI (the robot group), and 35 were treated with pedicle screw implantation assisted by a conventional C-arm X-ray machine (the traditional operation group). The pedicle screw placement grade was evaluated according to the Rampersaud scale. The correct rate of pedicle screw placement was calculated. The invasion of adjacent facet joints, VAS score (Visual Analogue Scale), NDI score (Neck Disability Index), SF-36 score (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire), EQ-5D score (EuroQol-5 dimensions questionnaire) and operation-related data were recorded, and patients were followed up. All patients were followed up for an average of 15.0 ± 3.4 months. The accuracy of screw placement in the robot group was higher than that in the traditional operation group, while the rates of intraoperative blood loss and invasion of the facet joint were lower and the incision length and length of hospital stay were shorter. On the 3rd day after the operation, the VAS score in the robot group was significantly higher than that in the traditional operation group, but there was no significant difference in the NDI score. On the 3rd day after the operation, the SF-36 and EQ-5 questionnaire scores of the robot group were better than those of the traditional operation group. No complications occurred in any of the patients. Postoperative cervical X-ray showed that the cervical vertebra was stable, and there was no fracture, angle or displacement. Postoperative CT showed that all fractures healed, and the average healing time was 3.4 months. The treatment of Levine-Edward IIA (postrepositioning) hangman fractures with percutaneous pedicle fixation assisted by the TINAVI orthopaedic surgery robot can significantly improve screw placement accuracy with a low rate of invasion of the adjacent facet joint, a short operation time, a low bleeding rate, and high patient satisfaction. Although there are still many disadvantages, it still has good prospects for application.

The efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin in patients undergoing knee arthroscopic surgery and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Purpose

To inveatigate how effective LMWH was at preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding events, and minor bleeding events after simple knee arthroscopic surgery and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the CNKI database for potentially eligible articles. The outcomes were evaluated in terms of odds ratio (OR) and the associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-analysis was performed using the Stata software and subgroup analyses were performed based on the surgical setting including ACLR and simple knee arthroscopic surgery.

Results

A total of eight studies with 2249 patients and 1794 controls were included in this meta-analysis. In patients undergoing simple knee arthroscopic surgery, LMWH prophylaxis did not bring a significant reduction in the risk of symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT), symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE), symptomatic VTE, and did not increase the risk of major bleeding events, but did have a higher risk of minor bleeding events (OR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.34-2.84, P = 0.000) and a lower risk of asymptomatic DVT (OR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.53, P = 0.004) in comparison with non-LMWH prophylaxis. In patients undergoing ACLR, LMWH prophylaxis did not bring a significant reduction in the risk of symptomatic DVT, symptomatic PE, symptomatic VTE, and did not increase the risk of major bleeding events and minor bleeding events, but did have a lower risk of asymptomatic DVT (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.78, P = 0.006).

Conclusion

When compared to a control group, this meta-analysis found that LMWH had little potential benefit in preventing major VTE (symptomatic VTE, symptomatic DVT, and symptomatic PE) after simple knee arthroscopy and ACLR. As a result, LMWH should not be considered routinely in patients undergoing knee arthroscopic surgery.

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.

Clinical application of spinal robot in cervical spine surgery: safety and accuracy of posterior pedicle screw placement in comparison with conventional freehand methods

The novel robot-assisted (RA) technique has been utilized increasingly to improve the accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement. Although the clinical application of the RA technique has been investigated in several case series and comparative studies, the superiority and safety of RA over conventional freehand (FH) methods remain controversial. Meanwhile, the intra-pedicular accuracy of the two methods has not been compared for patients with cervical traumatic conditions. This study aimed to compare the rate and risk factors of intra-pedicular accuracy of RA versus the conventional FH approach for posterior pedicle screw placement in cervical traumatic diseases. A total of 52 patients with cervical traumatic diseases who received cervical screw placement using RA (26 patients) and FH (26 patients) techniques were retrospectively included. The primary outcome was the intra-pedicular accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement according to the Gertzbin-Robbins scale. Secondary outcome parameters included surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospital stay, and complications. Moreover, the risk factors that possibly affected intra-pedicular accuracy were assessed using univariate analyses. Out of 52 screws inserted using the RA method, 43 screws (82.7%) were classified as grade A, with the remaining 7 (13.5%) and 2 (3.8%) screws classified as grades B and C. In the FH cohort, 60.8% of the 79 screws were graded A, with the remaining screws graded B (21, 26.6%), C (8, 10.1%), and D (2, 2.5%). The RA technique showed a significantly higher rate of optimal intra-pedicular accuracy than the FH method (P = 0.008), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of clinically acceptable accuracy (P = 0.161). Besides, the RA technique showed remarkably longer surgery time, less postoperative drainage, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and equivalent intraoperative blood loss and complications than the FH technique. Furthermore, the univariate analyses showed that severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane (P = 0.003) and shorter width of the lateral mass at the inferior margin of the posterior arch (P = 0.014) were risk factors related to the inaccuracy of C1 screw placement. The diagnosis of HRVA (P < 0.001), severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane (P < 0.001), short pedicle width (P < 0.001), and short pedicle height (P < 0.001) were risk factors related to the inaccuracy of C2 screw placement. RA cervical pedicle screw placement was associated with a higher rate of optimal intra-pedicular accuracy to the FH technique for patients with cervical traumatic conditions. The severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane independently contributed to high rates of the inaccuracy of C1 and C2 screw placements. RA pedicle screw placement is safe and useful for cervical traumatic surgery.

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.

Robot-assisted percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a retrospective matched-cohort study

PURPOSE

This study aims to introduce the principle, clinical efficacy, and learning curve of robot-assisted percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP).

METHODS

Forty-two patients who underwent robot-assisted single-level PVP were analyzed retrospectively and 42 age-matched patients using freehand technique were selected as the control group. The visual analog scale, operation time, radiation exposure, accuracy, and learning curve were analyzed.

RESULTS

The puncture time and total operation time were significantly shorter, and the puncture and total fluoroscopy number were fewer in the robot group. The deviation between pre-operative planned and actual puncture trajectory well met clinical requirement. The puncture time, total operation time, and puncture fluoroscopy number were significantly more in early cases than in later cases in the robot group.

CONCLUSION

The robot-assisted pedicle puncture technique shortens the operation time and reduces radiation exposure, and the accuracy meets the clinical requirement in PVP. The learning curve is short and not steep.

Predictors of accurate intrapedicular screw placement in single-level lumbar (L4-5) fusion: robot-assisted pedicle screw, traditional pedicle screw, and cortical bone trajectory screw insertion

Background

The superiorities in proximal facet joint protection of robot-assisted (RA) pedicle screw placement and screw implantation via the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) have rarely been compared. Moreover, findings on the screw accuracy of both techniques are inconsistent. Therefore, we analyzed the screw accuracy and incidence of facet joint violation (FJV) of RA and CBT screw insertion in the same study and compared them with those of conventional pedicle screw (PS) insertion. The possible factors affecting screw accuracy and FJV were also analyzed.

Methods

A total of 166 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases requiring posterior L4-5 fusion were retrospectively included and divided into the RA, PS, and CBT groups from March 2019 to December 2021. The grades of intrapedicular accuracy and superior FJV were evaluated according to the Gertzbin–Robbins scale and the Babu scale based on postoperative CT. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to assess the possible risk factors associated with intrapedicular accuracy and superior FJV.

Results

The rates of optimal screw insertion in the RA, PS, and CBT groups were 87.3%, 81.3%, and 76.5%, respectively. The difference between the RA and CBT groups was statistically significant (P = 0.004). Superior FJVs occurred in 28.2% of screws in RA, 45.0% in PS, and 21.6% in CBT. The RA and CBT groups had fewer superior FJVs than the PS group (P = 0.008 and P < 0.001, respectively), and no significant difference was observed between the RA and CBT groups (P = 0.267). Multivariable analysis revealed that the CBT technique was an independent risk factor for intrapedicular accuracy. Furthermore, older age, the conventional PS technique and a smaller facet angle were independently associated with the incidence of superior FJVs.

Conclusions

The RA and CBT techniques were associated with fewer proximal FJVs than the PS technique. The RA technique showed a higher rate of intrapedicular accuracy than the CBT technique. The CBT technique was independently associated with screw inaccuracy. Older age, conventional PS technique and coronal orientation of the facet join were independent risk factors for superior FJV.

Influence of the facet joint angle on facet joint degeneration following pedicle screw fixation without fusion in thoracolumbar fractures

BACKGROUND

Posterior approach pedicle screw fixation without fusion is widely used in the treatment of neurologically intact type A3 thoracolumbar fractures.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the influence of the facet joint (FJ) angle on FJ degeneration following posterior approach pedicle screw fixation without fusion in neurologically intact type A3 thoracolumbar fractures.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients who underwent pedicle screw fixation via the traditional posterior approach (n= 28) or the Wiltse approach (n= 30) were enrolled. A CT scan was performed before fixation and before fixation removal (Within 1.5 to 2 years after fixation) to evaluate the FJs parameters, including FJ inclination (FJI), FJ tropism (FJT), FJ violation, and FJ degeneration grade (FJDG), of three fixed segments and the adjacent segment below the fixed segments.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in FJ violation rate, FJDG deterioration, or FJ angle between the two groups (P> 0.05). FJDG deterioration showed a weak positive correlation with FJI and FJT before fixation, and the angular change in FJI (P< 0.05); and FJT before fixation and the angular change in FJI were risk factors for FJDG deterioration (P< 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The Wiltse approach did not increase the rate of FJDG deterioration and FJs angle changes. However, the FJT before fixation and the angular change in FJI were risk factors for FJDG deterioration.

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).

Emerging Technologies in the Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity

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

Overview of Robotic Technology in Spine Surgery

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

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.