Risk of Postoperative Complications and Revision Surgery Following Robot-assisted Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion

Robotic-Assisted Versus Navigation-Assisted Posterior Lumbar Fusion : A National Database Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare perioperative adverse events and reoperations between navigation-assisted and robotic-assisted posterior lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Navigation has become increasingly utilized for posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). More recently, robotic-assisted systems have been gaining traction. However, the incremental advantage of these systems has been unclear in the literature.

METHODS

Patients undergoing one-level to three-level PLF (with or without anterior or posterior interbody fusion) were identified from the 2015 to 2022 M161Ortho PearlDiver Database using CPT codes. Navigation assistance was identified based on CPT coding and robotic assistance was based on ICD-10 procedural coding. Navigation-assisted cases were matched 4:1 to robotic-assisted patients based on age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, number of levels fuse, and concomitant anterior fusion. Incidence of 90-day adverse outcomes were assessed and compared with multivariable logistical regression. Bonferroni correction was applied for multiple testing. Rate of reoperation was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2022, there has been a significant increase in both navigation-assisted and robotic-assisted lumbar fusions, with navigation-assisted surgery being significantly more common. After matching, there were 2401 navigation-assisted cases and 651 robotic-assisted cases. On multivariate analysis, there were no significant differences in 90-day any, severe, or minor adverse events. There was a significant increase odd of readmissions in the robotic cohort (OR: 1.77, P <0.001). There were no differences in 3-year reoperation rates between the navigation-assisted and robotic-assisted cohorts (95.8% vs. 94.0%, P =0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

As spinal navigation has been gaining popularity and robotic assistance is starting to be further utilized, the incremental advantage of different techniques may be questioned. While further study and technique evolution are ongoing, the current study was not able to demonstrate 90-day or 3-year incremental advantages for robotics relative to navigation based on the metrics evaluated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Development of a software system for surgical robots based on multimodal image fusion: study protocol

Background

Surgical robots are gaining increasing popularity because of their capability to improve the precision of pedicle screw placement. However, current surgical robots rely on unimodal computed tomography (CT) images as baseline images, limiting their visualization to vertebral bone structures and excluding soft tissue structures such as intervertebral discs and nerves. This inherent limitation significantly restricts the applicability of surgical robots. To address this issue and further enhance the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement, this study will develop a software system for surgical robots based on multimodal image fusion. Such a system can extend the application range of surgical robots, such as surgical channel establishment, nerve decompression, and other related operations.

Methods

Initially, imaging data of the patients included in the study are collected. Professional workstations are employed to establish, train, validate, and optimize algorithms for vertebral bone segmentation in CT and magnetic resonance (MR) images, intervertebral disc segmentation in MR images, nerve segmentation in MR images, and registration fusion of CT and MR images. Subsequently, a spine application model containing independent modules for vertebrae, intervertebral discs, and nerves is constructed, and a software system for surgical robots based on multimodal image fusion is designed. Finally, the software system is clinically validated.

Discussion

We will develop a software system based on multimodal image fusion for surgical robots, which can be applied to surgical access establishment, nerve decompression, and other operations not only for robot-assisted nail placement. The development of this software system is important. First, it can improve the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, percutaneous vertebroplasty, percutaneous kyphoplasty, and other surgeries. Second, it can reduce the number of fluoroscopies, shorten the operation time, and reduce surgical complications. In addition, it would be helpful to expand the application range of surgical robots by providing key imaging data for surgical robots to realize surgical channel establishment, nerve decompression, and other operations.

Risk Factors of Screw Malposition in Robot-Assisted Cortical Bone Trajectory: Analysis of 1344 Consecutive Screws in 256 Patients

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single-center study using prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence of and identify risk factors for intraoperative screw malposition secondary to skive or shift during robot-assisted cortical bone trajectory (RA-CBT) insertion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

RA-CBT screw malposition occurs through 2 distinct modes, skive or shift. Skive occurs when a downward force applied to the cannula, drill, tap, or screw, causes the instrument to deflect relative to its bony landmark. Shift is a change in the position of the RA system relative to the patient after registration.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A consecutive series of patients older than 18 years who underwent RA-CBT screw placement between January 2019 and July 2022 were enrolled. Baseline demographic and surgical data, Hounsfield Units (HUs) at L1, and vertebral shape related to screw planning were collected. Skive or shift was recorded in the operating room on a data collection form.

RESULTS

Of 1344 CBT screws in 256 patients, malposition was recognized intraoperatively in 33 screws (2.4%) in 27 patients (10.5%); 19 through skive in 17 and 14 through shift in 10 patients. These patients had higher body mass index than patients without malposition (33.0 vs. 30.5 kg/m 2 , P = 0.037). Patients with skive had higher HU (178.2 vs . 145.2, P = 0.035), compared with patients with shift (139.2 vs . 145.2, P = 0.935) and patients without screw malposition. More than half of the screw malposition was observed at the upper instrumented vertebra. At the upper instrumented vertebra, if the screw's overlap to the bone surface at the insertion point was decreased, skive was more likely (57% vs . 87%, P < 0.001). No patients were returned to the operating room for screw revision.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative screw malposition occurred in 2.4% of RA-CBT. High body mass index was associated with screw malposition, regardless of etiology. Skive was associated with high HU and decreased screw overlap to the bone surface at the insertion point.

Pushing the Limits of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery-From Preoperative to Intraoperative to Postoperative Management

The introduction of minimally invasive surgery ushered in a new era of spine surgery by minimizing the undue iatrogenic injury, recovery time, and blood loss, among other complications, of traditional open procedures. Over time, technological advancements have further refined the care of the operative minimally invasive spine patient. Moreover, pre-, and postoperative care have also undergone significant change by way of artificial intelligence risk stratification, advanced imaging for surgical planning and patient selection, postoperative recovery pathways, and digital health solutions. Despite these advancements, challenges persist necessitating ongoing research and collaboration to further optimize patient care in minimally invasive spine surgery.

Risk Factors for Medial Breach During Robotic-Assisted Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Insertion

OBJECTIVE

We describe the incidence of, and identify the risk factors for, a medial breach of the pedicle wall during robotic-assisted cortical bone trajectory (RA-CBT) screw insertion.

METHODS

We analyzed a consecutive series of adult patients who underwent RA-CBT screw placement from January 2019 to July 2022. To assess the pedicle wall medial breach, postoperative computed tomography (CT) images were analyzed. Patient demographic data and screw data were compared between patients with and without a medial breach. The Hounsfield units (HUs) on the L1 midvertebral axial CT scan was used to evaluate bone quality.

RESULTS

Of 784 CBT screws in 145 patients, 30 (3.8%) had a medial breach in 23 patients (15.9%). One screw was grade 2, and the others were grade 1. Patients with a medial breach had a lower HU value compared with the patients without a medial breach (123.3 vs. 150.5; P = 0.027). A medial breach was more common in the right than left side (5.5% vs. 2.0%; P = 0.014). More than one half of the screws with a medial breach were found in the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) compared with the middle construct or lowest instrumented vertebra (6.7% vs. 1.3% vs. 2.7%; P = 0.003). Binary logistic regression showed that low HU values, right-sided screw placement, and UIV were associated with a medial breach. No patients returned to the operating room for screw malposition. No differences were found in the clinical outcomes between patients with and without a medial breach.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of pedicle wall medial breach was 3.8% of RA-CBT screws in the postoperative CT images. A low HU value measured in the L1 axial image, right-sided screw placement, and UIV were associated with an increased risk of medial breach for RA-CBT screw placement.

100 Complex posterior spinal fusion cases performed with robotic instrumentation

Robotic navigation has been shown to increase precision, accuracy, and safety during spinal reconstructive procedures. There is a paucity of literature describing the best techniques for robotic-assisted spine surgery for complex, multilevel cases or in cases of significant deformity correction. We present a case series of 100 consecutive multilevel posterior spinal fusion procedures performed for multilevel spinal disease and/or deformity correction. 100 consecutive posterior spinal fusions were performed for multilevel disease and/or deformity correction utilizing robotic-assisted placement of pedicle screws. The primary outcome was surgery-related failure, which was defined as hardware breakage or reoperation with removal of hardware. A total of 100 consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. Among cases included, 31 were revision surgeries with existing hardware in place. The mean number of levels fused was 5.6, the mean operative time was 303 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 469 mL. 28 cases included robotic-assisted placement of S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws. In total, 1043 pedicle screws and 53 S2AI screws were placed with robotic-assistance. The failure rate using survivorship analysis was 18/1043 (1.7%) and the failure rate of S2AI screws using survivorship analysis was 3/53 (5.7%). Four patients developed postoperative wound infections requiring irrigation and debridement procedures. None of the 1043 pedicle screws nor the 53 S2AI screws required reoperation due to malpositioning or suboptimal placement. This case series of 100 multilevel posterior spinal fusion procedures demonstrates promising results with low failure rates. With 1043 pedicle screws and 53 S2AI screws, we report low failure rates of 1.7% and 5.7%, respectively with zero cases of screw malpositioning. Robotic screw placement allows for accurate screw placement with no increased rate of postoperative infection compared to historical controls. Level of evidence: IV, Retrospective review.

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

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective single-cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Opioid prescription trends after ambulatory anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Opioid utilization has been well studied for inpatient anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, the amount and type of opioids prescribed following ambulatory ACDF and the associated risk of persistent use are largely unknown.

PURPOSE

To characterize opioid prescription filling following single-level ambulatory ACDF compared with inpatient procedures.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Opioid-naive patients who underwent ambulatory (no overnight stay) or inpatient single-level ACDF from 2011 to 2019 were identified from a national insurance database.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate, amount, and type of perioperative opioid prescription.

METHODS

Opioid-naive patients who underwent ambulatory (no overnight stay) or inpatient single-level ACDF from 2011 to 2019 were identified from a national insurance database. Perioperative opioids were defined as opioid prescriptions 30 days before and 14 days after the procedure. Rate, amount, and type of opioid prescription were characterized. Multivariable analyses controlling for any differences in demographics and comorbidities between the two treatment groups were utilized to determine any association between surgical setting and persistent opioid use (defined as the patient still filling new opioid prescriptions >90 days postoperatively).

RESULTS

A total of 42,521 opioid-naive patients were identified, of which 2,850 were ambulatory and 39,671 were inpatient. Ambulatory ACDF was associated with slightly increased perioperative opioid prescription filling (52.7% vs 47.3% for inpatient procedures; p<.001). Among the 20,280 patients (47.7%) who filled perioperative opioid prescriptions, the average amount of opioids prescribed (in morphine milligram equivalents) was similar between ambulatory and inpatient procedures (550 vs 540, p=.413). There was no association between surgical setting and persistent opioid use in patients who filled a perioperative opioid prescription, even after controlling for comorbidities, (adjusted odds ratio, 1.15, p=.066).

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulatory ACDF patients who filled perioperative opioid prescriptions were prescribed a similar amount of opioids as those undergoing inpatient procedures. Further, ambulatory ACDF does not appear to be a risk factor for persistent opioid use. These findings are important for patient counseling as well as support the safety profile of this new surgical pathway.

The trend and future projection of technology-assisted total knee arthroplasty in the United States

BACKGROUND

As technology-assisted surgery has boosted in the last decades, we aimed to investigate the factors affecting adoption and to predict the future utilization of technology among patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Patients underwent TKA in 2017-2019 in the MarketScan Database were included. Percentage of technology-assisted surgery was calculated. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to analyse the factors and make the prediction.

RESULTS

Of 112,161 TKA procedures, 7.2% were technology-assisted. The proportion of technology-assisted TKA is expected to reach 50% by 2032. The West showed the highest proportion of technology-assisted TKA (12.3%), while the South had the lowest (5.7%). Over time, the Midwest showed the greatest increase in technology adoption (OR = 1.26 compared to the Northeast, 95% CI [1.15, 1.38]).

CONCLUSIONS

Technology adoption rate of TKA will continue to increase for the next 20 years in the United States with a slight geographical variation.

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

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

Sustainable low-field cardiovascular magnetic resonance in changing healthcare systems

Cardiovascular disease continues to be a major burden facing healthcare systems worldwide. In the developed world, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is a well-established non-invasive imaging modality in the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease. However, there is significant global inequality in availability and access to CMR due to its high cost, technical demands as well as existing disparities in healthcare and technical infrastructures across high-income and low-income countries. Recent renewed interest in low-field CMR has been spurred by the clinical need to provide sustainable imaging technology capable of yielding diagnosticquality images whilst also being tailored to the local populations and healthcare ecosystems. This review aims to evaluate the technical, practical and cost considerations of low field CMR whilst also exploring the key barriers to implementing sustainable MRI in both the developing and developed world.

Propensity-Matched Comparison of 90-Day Complications in Robotic-Assisted Versus Non-Robotic Assisted Lumbar Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single center propensity-matched observational cohort study that included patients who underwent 1- to 3-level lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 90-day complication rates between robotic-assisted and non-robotic-assisted lumbar spinal fusions in propensity-matched cohorts.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A recent administrative database (PearlDiver) study reported increased 30-day complications with the utilization of robotic-assisted enabling technology.

METHODS

Of 146 robotic-assisted cases that met inclusion criteria, 114 were successfully propensity matched to 114 patients from 214 cases who had 1 to 3 level lumbar fusion without robotic assistance based on age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologist grade, number of surgical levels, primary versus revision, and surgical approach (posterior-only or anterior-posterior). We excluded tumor, trauma, infection, or deformity cases. Outcomes included surgical and medical (major/minor) complications at intraoperative, immediately postoperative, 30- and 90-day postoperative intervals, including reoperations, and readmissions within 90 days.

RESULTS

All cause intraoperative complication rates were similar between non-robotic-assisted (5.3%) and robotic-assisted groups (10.5%, P = 0.366). Immediate postoperative medical complication rate was also similar between non-robotic-assisted (6.1%) and robotic-assisted groups (1.8%, P = 0.089). Thirty-day complication rates, 90-day complication rates, reoperation rates, and readmission rates showed no difference between non-robotic-assisted and robotic-assisted groups. There was no difference between return to OR for infection between the cohorts (non-robotic-assisted: 6 [5%] vs. robotic-assisted: 1 [0.8%], P = 0.119). There was however improved length of stay (LOS) in the robotic-assisted group compared with non-robotic-assisted group (2.5 vs. 3.17 days, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

In propensity-matched cohorts, patients undergoing 1- to 3-level robotic-assisted posterior lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions did not have increased 90-day complication rate, and had a shorter length of stay compared with non-robotic-assisted patients. There findings differ from a prior administrative database study as the robotic-assisted group in the current study had 0% return to OR for malpositioned screws and 0.8% return to OR for infection.Level of Evidence: 2.

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

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

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.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Posterior Lumbar Fusion-An Analysis of 90-Day Complications and Readmissions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate medical and surgical complication rates between robotic-assisted versus conventional elective posterior lumbar fusions.

METHODS

The Symphony Integrated DataVerse was queried using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, Clinical Modification procedure codes to identify patients undergoing elective posterior lumbar fusions for degenerative spine pathologies between 2015 and 2018. International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, Clinical Modification procedure codes (8E0W4CZ, 8E0W0CZ, 8E0W3CZ) were used to identify patients undergoing a robotic-assisted spinal fusion. Outcome measures were 90-day medical and surgical complications, 1-year pseudarthrosis, and 1-year revision surgery rates. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess whether undergoing a robotic-assisted fusion (vs. conventional fusion) was associated with differences in wound complications, medical complications, pseudarthrosis, revision surgery, and readmissions within 90 days of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 39,387 patients undergoing elective posterior lumbar fusions were included in the cohort-of whom 245 (0.62%) patients underwent a robotic-assisted fusion. Multivariate analysis showed that robotic-assisted fusion (vs. conventional fusion) was not associated with significant differences in 90-day rates of wound complications (P = 0.299), urinary tract infections (P = 0.648), acute myocardial infarctions (P = 0.209), acute renal failure (P = 0.461), pneumonia (P = 0.214), stroke (P = 0.917), deep venous thrombosis (P = 0.562), pulmonary embolism (P = 0.401), and readmissions (P = 0.985). In addition, there were no significant differences in the 1-year rates of revision fusions (P = 0.316) and pseudarthrosis (P = 0.695).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent a robotic-assisted fusion had similar rates of surgical and medical complications compared with those who underwent a conventional fusion. Further studies are warranted to better understand the future role of robots in spine surgery.

Operative time and learning curve between fluoroscopy-based instrument tracking and robot-assisted instrumentation for patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF)

INTRODUCTION

Instrument-navigation modalities including CT-guided and robot-assisted methods claim both efficacy and accuracy when applied to spine surgery, yet often increase setup and operating times which can translate to increased costs. To see the impact of different technologies on surgical efficiency, we studied the impact of a single surgeon's experience with a multitude of instrument navigational technologies.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) were analyzed. Consecutive cases were done with assistance of a robot (Mazor, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), with the assistance of fluoroscopic instrument-tracking (TrackX, North Carolina, USA), or fluoroscopy alone without adjunctive navigation in consecutive blocks of time. The cases done without assistance were used to normalize for number of interbody implants and decompressions performed as well as hardware removal if needed. Age, body mass index (BMI), sex, operative levels, laminectomy, need for hardware removal, and total operative time were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 119 cases (74 conventional, 13 robot-assisted, 32 instrument-tracking) were included in analysis. There were no significant differences in age, sex, or BMI between modalities. Average total operative time for robot-assisted, and instrument-tracking-assisted cases was 175.46 ± 46.86 min 119.63 ± 34.33 min, respectively, for each level (p < 0.05 across each group). After normalization against operative times from similar cases performed with conventional fluoroscopy, robotic-navigation added an average of 42.25 ± 28.35 min while use of instrument-tracking saved an average of 13.88 ± 38.69 min. There was no learning curve seen using robotic navigation, as operative times remained consistently longer than similar cases using conventional fluoroscopy and showed no sign of improvement over time. Cases using instrument-tracking were initially slower but trended downwards through approximately 11 patients, at which point operative times were consistently quicker (R² = 0.39). None of the assisted cases were abandoned in favor of standard fluoroscopy or required hardware revision.

CONCLUSION

Enabling technology can have a significant impact on surgical efficiency. Compared to MIS-TLIFs performed with standard fluoroscopy, those done with robotic-assistance consistently negatively impacted operative times while instrument-tracking was associated with a short learning curve and in the majority of cases studied showed improved operative times.