Robotic Guidance for S2-Alar-Iliac Screws in Spinal Deformity Correction

Utilizing robotic-assisted navigation for pelvic instrumentation in pediatric patients with neuromuscular scoliosis: a technical note and case series

Pelvic fixation is commonly used in correcting pelvic obliquity in pediatric patients with neuromuscular scoliosis and in preserving stability in adult patients with lumbosacral spondylolisthesis or instances of traumatic or osteoporotic fracture. S2-alar-iliac screws are commonly used in this role and have been proposed to reduce implant prominence when compared to traditional pelvic fusion utilizing iliac screws. The aim of this technical note is to describe a technique for robotically navigated placement of S2-alar-iliac screws in pediatric patients with neuromuscular scoliosis, which (a) minimizes the significant exposure needed to identify a bony start point, (b) aids in instrumenting the irregular anatomy often found in patients with neuromuscular scoliosis, and (c) allows for greater precision than traditional open or fluoroscopic techniques. We present five cases that underwent posterior spinal fusion to the pelvis with this technique that demonstrate the safety and efficacy of this procedure.

Spinal Robotics in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Systematic Review

Spinal robotics have the potential to improve the consistency of outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. The objective of this paper is to assess the accuracy of pedicle and S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws placed with robotic guidance in ASD patients. PubMed Central, Google Scholar, and an institutional library database were queried until May 2023. Articles were included if they described ASD correction via robotic guidance and pedicle and/or S2AI screw accuracy. Articles were excluded if they described pediatric/adolescent spinal deformity or included outcomes for both ASD and non-ASD patients without separating the data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Primary endpoints were pedicle screw accuracy based on the Gertzbein-Robbins Scale and self-reported accuracy percentages for S2AI screws. Data were extracted for patient demographics, operative details, and perioperative outcomes and assessed using descriptive statistics. Five studies comprising 138 patients were included (mean age 66.0 years; 85 females). A total of 1,508 screws were inserted using robotic assistance (51 S2AI screws). Two studies assessing pedicle screws reported clinically acceptable trajectory rates of 98.7% and 96.0%, respectively. Another study reported a pedicle screw accuracy rate of 95.5%. Three studies reported 100% accuracy across 51 total S2AI screws. Eight total complications and 4 reoperations were reported. Current evidence supports the application of robotics in ASD surgery as safe and effective for placement of both screw types. However, due to the paucity of data, a comprehensive assessment of its incremental benefit over other techniques cannot be made. Further work using expanded cohorts is merited.

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.

Advances in robotics and pediatric spine surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Robotic-assisted surgical navigation for placement of pedicle screws is one of the most recent technological advancements in spine surgery. Excellent accuracy and reliability results have been documented in the adult population, but adoption of robotic surgical navigation is uncommon in pediatric spinal deformity surgery. Pediatric spinal anatomy and the specific pediatric pathologies present unique challenges to adoption of robotic assisted spinal deformity workflows. The purpose of this article is to review the safety, accuracy and learning curve data for pediatric robotic-assisted surgical navigation as well as to identify "best use" cases and technical tips.

RECENT FINDINGS

Robotic navigation has been demonstrated as a safe, accurate and reliable method to place pedicle screws in pediatric patients with a moderate learning curve. There are no prospective studies comparing robotically assisted pedicle screw placement with other techniques for screw placement, however several recent studies in the pediatric literature have demonstrated high accuracy and safety as well as high reliability. In addition to placement of pediatric pedicle screws in the thoracic and lumbar spine, successful and safe placement of screws in the pelvis and sacrum have also been reported with reported advantages over other techniques in the setting of high-grade spondylolisthesis as well as pelvic fixation utilizing S2-alar iliac (S2AI) screws.

SUMMARY

Early studies have demonstrated that robotically assisted surgical navigation for pedicle screws and pelvic fixation for S2AI screws is safe, accurate, and reliable in the pediatric population with a moderate learning curve.

Sacropelvic fixation

The sacropelvis is not only an anatomically complex region but also a biomechanically unique zone transferring axial weights via the transitional lumbosacral junction and the pelvic girdle to the lower appendicular skeleton. When the sacral instrumentation alone is insufficient to achieve stability and solid arthrodesis across the lumbosacral junction, as in long-segment fusions, high-grade spondylolisthesis, deformity corrections, complex sacral/lumbosacral injuries, and neoplasms, sacropelvic fixation is indicated. Many modern sacropelvic fixation modalities outperform historical modalities, especially the conventionally open and percutaneous iliac and S2-alar-iliac screw (S2AI) fixation techniques. Novel screw insertion technologies such as navigation and robotics and modern screw designs aim to maximize the accuracy of screw placement and minimize complications. This review addresses the anatomy and biomechanics of the sacropelvic region as well as the indications, evolution, advantages, and disadvantages of various past and contemporary techniques of lumbosacral and sacropelvic fixation.

Sacroiliac screws fixation navigated with three-dimensional printing personalized guide template for the treatment of posterior pelvic ring injury: A case report

Objective

Pelvic injuries refer to the disruption of the inherent structural and mechanical integrity of the pelvic ring. Sacroiliac screw fixation technique is often used for the treatment of posterior pelvic ring injury, which is prone to the iatrogenic injury. Various attempts were proposed to avoid iatrogenic injuries, while the executing processes are usually too cumbersome. The patient-personalized guide template based on 3D printing technology has been considered as a promising method, which can achieve lower deviation and higher accuracy in a simple and convenient way. We reported the first case of posterior pelvic ring injury using 3D printing personalized guide template with the verification of intraoperative CT.

Methods

The subject was a 74-year-old female with posterior pelvic ring injury. Two patient-specific guide templates were customized based on 3D printing technology, one for S1 and the other for S2. We used the guide templates for navigation to place the sacroiliac screws. The placement of screws was verified by intraoperative CT. Intraoperative and postoperative variables were collected.

Results

The technique helped us successfully insert the sacroiliac screws into the safe zone. The intraoperative blood loss was 23.03 ml, and the duration of operation was 62 min. The exposure dose during CT scanning was 7.025 mSv. The assessment of screws position was excellent. Furthermore, there was no sign of any functional impairment postoperatively.

Conclusion

Sacroiliac screws fixation with the assistance of 3D printing personalized guide template under the verification of intraoperative CT may be a promising method to treat posterior pelvic ring injuries.

Freehand S2-Alar-Iliac Screw Placement Technique in Lumbosacral Spinal Tumors: A Preliminary Study

OBJECTIVE

S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw technique is widely used in spinal surgery, but it is rarely seen in the field of spinal tumors. The aim of the study is to report the preliminary outcomes of the freehand S2AI screw fixation after lumbosaral tumor resection.

METHODS

The records of patients with lumbosacral tumor who underwent S2AI screw fixation between November 2016 to November 2020 at our center were reviewed retrospectively. Outcome measures included operative time, blood loss, complications, accuracy of screws, screw breach, and overall survival. Mean ± standard deviation or range was used to present continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier curve was used to present postoperative survival.

RESULTS

A total of 23 patients were identified in this study, including 12 males and 11 females, with an average age of 47.3 ± 14.5 (range,15-73). The mean operation time was 224.6 ± 54.1 (range, 155-370 min). The average estimated blood loss was 1560.9 ± 887.0 (600-4000 ml). A total of 46 S2AI screws were implanted by freehand technique. CT scans showed three (6.5%) screws had penetrated the iliac cortex, indicating 93.5% implantation accuracy rate. No complications of iatrogenic neurovascular or visceral structure were observed. The average follow-up time was 31.6 ± 15.3 months (range, 13-60 months). Two patients' postoperative plain radiography showed lucent zone around the screw. One patient underwent reoperation for wound delayed infection. At the latest follow-up, eight patients had tumor-free survival, 11 had survival with tumor, and four died of disease.

CONCLUSION

The freehand S2AI screw technique is reproducible, safe, and reliable in the management of lumbosacral spinal tumors.

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

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

Robotic Spine Surgery: Past, Present, and Future

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to present an overview of robotic spine surgery (RSS) including its history, applications, limitations, and future directions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The first RSS platform received United States Food and Drug Administration approval in 2004. Since then, robotic-assisted placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws has been extensively studied. More recently, expanded applications of RSS have been introduced and evaluated.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Cochrane, OVID-MEDLINE, and PubMed databases was performed for articles relevant to robotic spine surgery. Institutional review board approval was not needed.

RESULTS

The placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws using RSS is safe and accurate and results in reduced radiation exposure for the surgeon and surgical team. Barriers to utilization exist including learning curve and large capital costs. Additional applications involving minimally invasive techniques, cervical pedicle screws, and deformity correction have emerged.

CONCLUSION

Interest in RSS continues to grow as the applications advance in parallel with image guidance systems and minimally invasive techniques.

IRB APPROVAL

N/A.

Challenges and Complications in Freehand S2-Alar-Iliac Spinopelvic Fixation and the Potential for Robotics to Enhance Patient Safety

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Summary Review for Navigation & Robotics Focus Issue.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the challenges and complications of S2-Alar-Iliac (S2AI) spinopelvic fixation using freehand techniques, and to introduce the utility of navigation & robotics to enhance patient safety.

METHODS

This study involved search of literature using the PubMed database, including retrospective clinical studies, anatomic reports, and surgical reports. The intention was to find literature that discussed complications regarding screw malfunction from manual S2AI placement, anatomical complexity of the sacroiliac joint, and outcomes of S2AI procedures conducted with robotic guidance systems.

RESULTS

The sacroiliac joint presents numerous complexities that can lead to challenges in free-hand placement of the S2-alar-iliac screw. Anatomic considerations of the S2AI screw involve close proximity to vital neurovascular structures, including: superior gluteal vessels, external iliac vessels, pudendal vessels, superior gluteal nerves, sciatic nerve, sympathetic chain ganglia, and pudendal nerves. The complications associated with manual S2AI screw installation include screw misplacement, breach of cortical bone, and injury to neurovascular structures. Robotic techniques for establishing S2AI screws involve greater accuracy of screw placement and reduced complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Accurate placement of S2AI screws is compromised by variation in pelvic anatomy and by a pathway that traverses dense cortical bone of the sacroiliac joint. Accurate placement of S2AI screws is important for patient safety regarding neurovascular structures, and for effective, stable fixation across the SI joint. Robotic navigation of S2AI fixation offers significant utility in improving the accuracy of screw placement and patient safety.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Evolution of Complex Spine Surgery in Neurosurgery: From Big to Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Spinal Deformity

Spinal instrumentation for adult spinal deformity dates back to the surgical correction of secondary complications from infectious processes, such as Pott's disease and poliomyelitis [1]. With the population aging at a longer life expectancy today, advanced degenerative spinal diseases and idiopathic scoliosis supersede as the most common causes of adult spinal deformity. Correction of the thoracolumbar malignment, specifically, has rapidly evolved with the burgeoning success of spinal instrumentation. The objective of this chapter is to review the metamorphosis of operative principles for adult thoracolumbar deformity, from aggressive osteotomies in the posterior bony elements to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) at the intervertebral disc space.

Novel Technique for Sacral-Alar-Iliac Screw Placement Using Three-Dimensional Patient-Specific Template Guide

Introduction

The sacral-alar-iliac (SAI) screw technique is becoming popular for sacropelvic fixation. However, appropriately placing SAI screws is technically demanding because of a narrow safe corridor and the risk of neurovascular/visceral injuries. Recently, a three-dimensional patient-specific template guiding technique for pedicle screw placement has been considered a promising method to improve accuracy and safety. The objective of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of SAI screw placement with a patient-specific template guide using cadaveric and prospective clinical pilot studies.

Methods

Three-dimensional planning of SAI screw placement, including entry point, screw trajectory, length, and diameter, was performed using a computer simulation software. Then, three-dimensional printed patient-specific template guides were created based on the plan. Firstly, a total of 12 SAI screws were placed for 6 cadaveric specimens using the guides. Next, in a prospective clinical trial, a total of 20 SAI screws were placed for 10 consecutively enrolled patients. The safety and accuracy of screw placement were analyzed using postoperative computed tomography by the evaluation of any cortical breach and measurement of screw deviations between the planned and actual screw positions.

Results

All the screws showed no perforation. In the cadaveric study, the mean horizontal and vertical deviations from the planned screw position at the entry point were 1.40±1.21 mm and 1.34±1.09 mm, respectively. The mean angular deviations in the sagittal and transverse planes were 1.68°±1.24° and 1.53°±1.06°, respectively. The results of the clinical study showed comparable accuracy with those of the cadaveric study, except for the vertical deviation at the entry point (p=0.048).

Conclusions

This is the first study to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of using a patient-specific template guide for SAI screw placement. This technique could become an effective solution to achieve accurate screw placement.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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.

Robot-assisted revision of sacroiliac joint fusion using a triangular titanium implant in an S2-alar-iliac trajectory: illustrative case

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction can lead to significant pain and disability, greatly impairing quality of life. Arthrodesis may take up to 1 year to occur, after which revision can be considered. There is a need for highly accurate and reproducible techniques for revision that allow for purchase through undisturbed bone to prevent prolonged pain and disability. Moreover, a minimally invasive technique for revision would be favorable for recovery, particularly in elderly patients.

OBSERVATIONS

An 84-year-old man with a prior history of lumbar fusion presented with severe buttock pain limiting ambulation and sitting because of the failure of arthrodesis after SIJ fusion 1 year earlier. He underwent revision using a triangular titanium implant (TTI) in an S2-alar-iliac (S2-AI) trajectory under robotic guidance, which is a novel technique not yet described in the literature. The patient’s pain largely resolved, he was able to ambulate independently, and his quality of life improved tremendously. There were no complications of surgery.

LESSONS

Placement of a TTI using an S2-AI trajectory is a safe and effective method for revision that can be considered for elderly patients. Robot-assisted navigation can be used to facilitate an accurate and reproducible approach using a minimally invasive approach.

Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

OBJECTIVES

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have emerged as disruptive technologies with the potential to drastically affect clinical decision making in spine surgery. AI can enhance the delivery of spine care in several arenas: (1) preoperative patient workup, patient selection, and outcome prediction; (2) quality and reproducibility of spine research; (3) perioperative surgical assistance and data tracking optimization; and (4) intraoperative surgical performance. The purpose of this narrative review is to concisely assemble, analyze, and discuss current trends and applications of AI and ML in conventional and robotic-assisted spine surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive PubMed search of peer-reviewed articles that were published between 2006 and 2019 examining AI, ML, and robotics in spine surgery. Key findings were then compiled and summarized in this review.

RESULTS

The majority of the published AI literature in spine surgery has focused on predictive analytics and supervised image recognition for radiographic diagnosis. Several investigators have studied the use of AI/ML in the perioperative setting in small patient cohorts; pivotal trials are still pending.

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial intelligence has tremendous potential in revolutionizing comprehensive spine care. Evidence-based, predictive analytics can help surgeons improve preoperative patient selection, surgical indications, and individualized postoperative care. Robotic-assisted surgery, while still in early stages of development, has the potential to reduce surgeon fatigue and improve technical precision.

Sacral fractures: An updated and comprehensive review

Sacral fractures are often underdiagnosed but are relatively frequent in the setting of pelvic ring injury. Causes include traumatic insults and osteoporosis. Sacral fractures have become more frequent owing to the growth of the elderly population worldwide as osteoporosis is an age-related disease. Misdiagnosed and neglected sacral fractures can result in chronic back pain, spine deformity, and instability. Unfortunately, the wide range of classification systems hinders adequate communication among clinicians. Therefore, a complete understanding of the pathology, and communication within the interdisciplinary team, are necessary to ensure adequate treatment and satisfactory clinical outcomes. The aim of this manuscript is to present the current knowledge available regarding classification systems, clinical assessment, decision-making factors, and current treatment options.

Augmented Reality Navigated Sacral-Alar-Iliac Screw Insertion

BACKGROUND

Sacral-alar-iliac (SAI) screws are increasingly used for lumbo-pelvic fixation procedures. Insertion of SAI screws is technically challenging, and surgeons often rely on costly and time-consuming navigation systems. We investigated the accuracy and precision of an augmented reality (AR)-based and commercially available head-mounted device requiring minimal infrastructure.

METHODS

A pelvic sawbone model served to drill pilot holes of 80 SAI screw trajectories by 2 surgeons, randomly either freehand (FH) without any kind of navigation or with AR navigation. The number of primary pilot hole perforations, simulated screw perforation, minimal axis/outer cortical wall distance, true sagittal cranio-caudal inclination angle (tSCCIA), true axial medio-lateral angle, and maximal screw length (MSL) were measured and compared to predefined optimal values.

RESULTS

In total, 1/40 (2.5%) of AR-navigated screw hole trajectories showed a perforation before passing the inferior gluteal line compared to 24/40 (60%) of FH screw hole trajectories (P < .05). The differences between FH- and AR-guided holes compared to optimal values were significant for tSCCIA with -10.8° ± 11.77° and MSL -65.29 ± 15 mm vs 55.04 ± 6.76 mm (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the additional anatomical information provided by the AR headset and the superimposed operative plan improved the precision of drilling pilot holes for SAI screws in a laboratory setting compared to the conventional FH technique. Further technical development and validation studies are currently being performed to investigate potential clinical benefits of the AR-based navigation approach described here.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Description of the Sacropelvic Parameters Measurement Method for S2-alar iliac Screw Insertion

Objective  Description of the sacropelvic parameters measurement method for S2-alar iliac (S2AI) screw insertion. Methods  Descriptive study of the method for measuring sacropelvic parameters for the insertion of the S2AI screw using computed tomography (CT). The data evaluated in multiplanar reconstructions were the parameters of the screw trajectory, including length, diameter and angles of the trajectory in the axial and sagittal planes. Results  From the sagittal reconstruction, the axis of the series of axial slices is angled three-dimensionally so that it is possible to visualize the S2 vertebra, the screw entry point, and the anteroinferior iliac spine (AIIS) in the same plane. The entry point is demarcated at the midpoint between the dorsal foramina of S1 and S2. To measure the length of the screw, lines are drawn tangent to the inner and outer cortices of the iliac. The diameter is determined by the shortest distance between the inner and outer iliac faces minus half of the diameter of the screw chosen medially and laterally. The path angle in the axial plane is formed by the anteroposterior midline of the sacrum and the line of the screw length. The craniocaudal inclination angle in relation to the S1 plateau corresponds to the degree of inclination made in the sagittal plane to find the image in which the entry point and the AIIS are seen in the same plane. Conclusion  It was possible to adequately assess, through multiplanar CT reconstructions, the sacropelvic parameters necessary for the safe insertion of the S2AI screw.

Accuracy of S2 Alar-Iliac Screw Placement Under the Guidance of a 3D-Printed Surgical Guide Template

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and accuracy of S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw placement guided by a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed surgical guide template.

METHODS

The data of 27 patients treated with S2AI screws were analyzed. S2AI surgical guide templates were designed and printed, and S2AI screw placement was completed intraoperatively with the guide templates. Postoperative computed tomography was performed to measure screw path parameters, namely the sagittal angle (SA), the transverse angle (TA), the horizontal distance (HD) between the entry point of the screw and the median sacral crest, and the vertical distance (VD) between the entry point of the screw and the lower edge of the first posterior sacral foramen. Screw placement was graded according to the Oh grading criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 54 S2AI screws were placed. The screw grades were as follows: 52 screws were considered grade 0, 2 were grade 1, none were grade 2, and none were grade 3. Thus grade 0 accounted for 96.3% of the screws. When the preoperatively planned SA (32.3° ± 2.0°), TA (42.1° ± 3.9°), HD (5.1 ± 1.1) mm, and VD (19.0 ± 2.4) mm were compared with the corresponding postoperative SA (31.9° ± 3.8°), TA (42.5° ± 4.0°), HD (4.9 ± 1.1) mm, and VD (19.1 ± 2.3) mm, no significant differences were identified (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

S2AI screw placement assisted by a 3D-printed surgical guide is safe and accurate.

Robotic spine surgery: a review of the present status

With technological advancements being introduced and dominating many fields, spine surgery is no exception. In view of the patient safety and surgeon's comfort, robotics has been introduced in spine surgery. Due to small corridors for work, little room for inaccuracy, lengthy and tedious procedures, spine surgery is an ideal scenario for robotics to establish as the standard of care. Spine robotics received their first FDA clearance in 2004. New generation of spine robotics with integrated navigation systems has become available now. The primary role of spine robotics, at present, is to aid pedicle screw fixation. High quality studies have been performed to establish its role in increasing the accuracy of pedicle fixation. Studies have also reported decreased radiation and decreased operative time with spine robotics. However, few studies have reported otherwise. It is still in its nascent stage in both industrial view and surgeon familiarity. Continued research to overcome the challenges such as high cost and steep learning curve is crucial for its widespread use. Also, expanding the scope of spine robotics beyond pedicle screw fixation such as osteotomies and dural procedures would be an area for potential research. This review is intended to provide an overview of various studies in the field of robotic spine surgery and its present status.

Combination of sacral-alar-iliac screw and cortical bone trajectory screw techniques for lumbosacral fixation: technical note

OBJECTIVE

Lumbosacral fixation plays an important role in the management of devastating spinal pathologies, including osteoporosis, fracture, infection, tumor resection, and spinal deformities, which require long-segment fusion constructs to the sacrum. The sacral-alar-iliac (SAI) screw technique has been developed as a promising solution to facilitate both minimal invasiveness and strong fixation. The rationale for SAI screw insertion is a medialized entry point away from the ilium and in line with cranial screws. The divergent screw path of the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) provides a higher amount of cortical bone purchase and strong screw fixation and has the potential to harmoniously align with SAI screws due to its medial starting point. However, there has been no report on the combination of these two techniques. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of this combination technique.

METHODS

The subjects consisted of 17 consecutive patients with a mean age of 74.2 ± 4.7 years who underwent posterior lumbosacral fixation for degenerative spinal pathologies using the combination of SAI and CBT fixation techniques. There were 8 patients with degenerative scoliosis, 7 with degenerative kyphosis, 1 with an osteoporotic vertebral fracture at L5, and 1 with vertebral metastasis at L5. Fusion zones included T10-sacrum in 13 patients, L2-sacrum in 2, and L4-sacrum in 2.

RESULTS

No patients required complicated rod bending or the use of a connector for rod assembly in the lumbosacral region. Postoperative CT performed within a week after surgery showed that all lumbosacral screws were in correct positions and there was no incidence of neurovascular injuries. The lumbosacral bone fusion was confirmed in 81.8% of patients at 1-year follow-up based on fine-cut CT scanning. No patient showed a significant loss of spinal alignment or rod fracture in the lumbosacral transitional region.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first paper on the feasibility of a combination technique using SAI and CBT screws. This technique could be a valid option for lumbosacral fixation due to the ease of rod placement with potential reductions in operative time and blood loss.

Evolution of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Surgery

Spine surgery has evolved over centuries from first being practiced with Hippocratic boards and ladders to now being able to treat spinal pathologies with minimal tissue invasion. With the advent of new imaging and surgical technologies, spine surgeries can now be performed minimally invasively with smaller incisions, less blood loss, quicker return to daily activities, and increased visualization. Modern minimally invasive procedures include percutaneous pedicle screw fixation techniques and minimally invasive lateral approach for lumbar interbody fusion (i.e., minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, extreme lateral interbody fusion, oblique lateral interbody fusion) and midline lumbar fusion with cortical bone trajectory screws. Just as evolutions in surgical techniques have helped revolutionize the field of spine surgery, imaging technologies have also contributed significantly. The advent of computer image guidance has allowed spine surgeons to advance their ability to refine surgical techniques, increase the accuracy of spinal hardware placement, and reduce radiation exposure to the operating room staff. As the field of spine surgery looks to the future, many novel technologies are on the horizon, including robotic spine surgery, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to help improve preoperative planning, improve surgical execution, and optimize patient selection to ensure improved postoperative outcomes and patient satisfaction. As more spine surgeons begin incorporating these novel minimally invasive techniques into practice, the field of minimally invasive spine surgery will continue to innovate and evolve over the coming years.

Robotic Spine Surgery: Current State in Minimally Invasive Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

OBJECTIVES

Robotic systems in spinal surgery may offer potential benefits for both patients and surgeons. In this article, the authors explore the future prospects and current limitations of robotic systems in minimally invasive spine surgery.

METHODS

We describe recent developments in robotic spine surgery and minimally invasive spine surgery. Institutional review board approval was not needed.

RESULTS

Although robotic application in spine surgery has been gradual, the past decade has seen the arrival of several novel robotic systems for spinal procedures, suggesting the evolution of technology capable of augmenting surgical ability.

CONCLUSION

Spine surgery is well positioned to benefit from robotic assistance and automation. Paired with enhanced navigation technologies, robotic systems have tremendous potential to supplement the skills of spine surgeons, improving patient safety and outcomes while limiting complications and costs.

Sacropelvic fixation techniques - Current update

Sacropelvic is a complex junctional area owing to the complex regional anatomy and higher biomechanical stress. However extension of construct is indicated in cases with complex deformities, high grade spondylolisthesis, and complex fractures. The challenges remain which includes pseudoarthrosis and fixation failures. The fixation techniques have constantly evolved over time with better results with iliac screws and S2-alar-iliac screws. This article gives background on evolution, biomechanics, and recent update of use of robotics for sacropelvic fixation.

Robotic-Assisted Spine Surgery: History, Efficacy, Cost, And Future Trends

Robot-assisted spine surgery has recently emerged as a viable tool to enable less invasive and higher precision surgery. The first-ever spine robot, the SpineAssist (Mazor Robotics Ltd., Caesarea, Israel), gained FDA approval in 2004. With its ability to provide real-time intraoperative navigation and rigid stereotaxy, robotic-assisted surgery has the potential to increase accuracy while decreasing radiation exposure, complication rates, operative time, and recovery time. Currently, robotic assistance is mainly restricted to spinal fusion and instrumentation procedures, but recent studies have demonstrated its use in increasingly complex procedures such as spinal tumor resections and ablations, vertebroplasties, and deformity correction. However, robots do require high initial costs and training, and thus, require justification for their incorporation into common practice. In this review, we discuss the history of spinal robots along as well as currently available systems. We then examine the literature to evaluate accuracy, operative time, complications, radiation exposure, and costs – comparing robotic-assisted to traditional fluoroscopy-assisted freehand approaches. Finally, we consider future applications for robots in spine surgery.

The Prevalence and Risk Factors for S2 Alar-Iliac Screw Loosening with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence and risk factors for S2 alar-iliac (SAI) screw loosening following lumbosacral fixation, with a minimum 2-year follow-up.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Although SAI screws allow surgeons to perform lumbosacral fixation with a low profile and enhanced biomechanical strength, screw loosening following surgery can occur in some cases. However, few studies have investigated the prevalence and risk factors for SAI screw loosening.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 35 patients (mean age, 72.8±8.0 years; male, 10; female, 25) who underwent lumbosacral fixation using SAI screws with at least 2 years of follow-up. SAI screw loosening and L5-S bony fusion were assessed using computed tomography. The period for which the screws appeared loose and the risk factors for SAI screw loosening were investigated 2 years after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 70 SAI screws and 70 S1 pedicle screws were inserted. Loosening was observed 0.5, 1, and 2 years after surgery in 17 (24.3%), 35 (50.0%), and 35 (50.0%) SAI screws, respectively. Bony fusion rate at L5-S was significantly lower in patients with SAI screw loosening than in those without screw loosening (65.0% vs. 93.3%, p =0.048). The score for SAI screw contact with the iliac cortical bone and the bony fusion rate at L5-S were significantly lower in the loosening group than in the non-loosening group (1.8±0.5 vs. 2.2±0.3, p <0.001, respectively). Postoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis was significantly higher in the loosening group than in the non-loosening group (7.9°±15.4° vs. 0.5°±8.7°, p =0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

SAI screw loosening is closely correlated with pseudoarthrosis at L5-S. Appropriate screw insertion and optimal lumbar lordosis restoration are important to prevent postoperative complications related to SAI screws.

Robotics in spinal surgery

Although the da Vinci robot system has garnered much attention in the realm of surgery over the past few decades, several new surgical robotic systems have been developed for spinal surgery with varying levels of robot autonomy and surgeon-specified input. These devices are currently being considered as potential avenues for increasing the precision of any surgical intervention. The following review will attempt to provide an overview of robotics in modern spine surgery and how these devices will continue to be employed in various sectors across the field.

Grade II Spondylolisthesis: Reverse Bohlman Procedure with Transdiscal S1-L5 and S2 Alar Iliac Screws Placed with Robotic Guidance

BACKGROUND

Grade II spondylolisthesis remains a complex surgical pathology for which there is no consensus regarding optimal surgical strategies. Surgical strategies vary regarding extent of reduction, use of instrumentation/interbody support, and anterior versus posterior approaches with or without decompression. Here we provide the first report on the efficacy of robotic spinal surgery systems in support of the treatment of grade II spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

Using 2 illustrative cases, we provide a technical report describing how robotic spinal surgery platform can be used to treatment grade II spondylolisthesis with a novel instrumentation strategy.

RESULTS

We describe how the "reverse Bohlman" technique to achieve a large anterior fusion construct spanning the pathological level and buttressed by the adjacent level above, coupled with a novel, high-fidelity posterior fixation scheme with transdiscal S1-L5 and S2 alar iliac (S2AI) screws placed in a minimally invasive fashion with robot guidance allows for the best chance of fusion in situ.

CONCLUSIONS

The reverse Bohlman technique coupled with transdiscal S1-L5 and S2AI screw fixation accomplishes the surgical goals of creating a solid fusion construct, avoiding neurologic injury with aggressive reduction, and halting the progression of anterolisthesis. The use of robot guidance allows for efficient placement of these difficult screw trajectories in a minimally invasive fashion.

The use of robotics in minimally invasive spine surgery

The field of spine surgery has changed significantly over the past few decades as once technological fantasy has become reality. The advent of stereotaxis, intra-operative navigation, endoscopy, and percutaneous instrumentation have altered the landscape of spine surgery. The concept of minimally invasive spine (MIS) surgery has blossomed over the past ten years and now robot-assisted spine surgery is being championed by some as another potential paradigm altering technological advancement. The application of robotics in other surgical specialties has been shown to be a safe and feasible alternative to the traditional, open approach. In 2004 the Mazor Spine Assist robot was approved by FDA to assist with placement of pedicle screws and since then, more advanced robots with promising clinical outcomes have been introduced. Currently, robotic platforms are limited to pedicle screw placement. However, there are centers investigating the role of robotics in decompression, dural closure, and pre-planned osteotomies. Robot-assisted spine surgery has been shown to increase the accuracy of pedicle screw placement and decrease radiation exposure to surgeons. However, modern robotic technology also has certain disadvantages including a high introductory cost, steep learning curve, and inherent technological glitches. Currently, robotic spine surgery is in its infancy and most of the objective evidence available regarding its benefits draws from the use of robots in a shared-control model to assist with the placement of pedicle screws. As artificial intelligence software and feedback sensor design become more sophisticated, robots could facilitate other, more complex surgical tasks such as bony decompression or dural closure. The accuracy and precision afforded by the current robots available for use in spinal surgery potentially allow for even less tissue destructive and more meticulous MIS surgery. This article aims to provide a contemporary review of the use of robotics in MIS surgery.

The Arrival of Robotics in Spine Surgery: A Review of the Literature

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

The authors aim to review comparative outcome measures between robotic and free-hand spine surgical procedures including: accuracy of spinal instrumentation, radiation exposure, operative time, hospital stay, and complication rates.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Misplacement of pedicle screws in conventional open as well as minimally invasive surgical procedures has prompted the need for innovation and allowed the emergence of robotics in spine surgery. Before incorporation of robotic surgery in routine practice, demonstration of improved instrumentation accuracy, operative efficiency, and patient safety are required.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, OVID-MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases was performed for articles relevant to robotic assistance of pedicle screw placement. Inclusion criteria were constituted by English written randomized control trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies involving robotic instrumentation in the spine. Following abstract, title, and full-text review, 32 articles were selected for study inclusion.

RESULTS

Intrapedicular accuracy in screw placement and subsequent complications were at least comparable if not superior in the robotic surgery cohort. There is evidence supporting that total operative time is prolonged in robot-assisted surgery compared to conventional free-hand. Radiation exposure appeared to be variable between studies; radiation time did decrease in the robot arm as the total number of robotic cases ascended, suggesting a learning curve effect. Multilevel procedures appeared to tend toward earlier discharge in patients undergoing robotic spine surgery.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of robotic technology for pedicle screw placement yields an acceptable level of accuracy on a highly consistent basis. Surgeons should remain vigilant about confirmation of robotic-assisted screw trajectory, as drilling pathways have been shown to be altered by soft tissue pressures, forceful surgical application, and bony surface skiving. However, the effective consequence of robot-assistance on radiation exposure, length of stay, and operative time remains unclear and requires meticulous examination in future studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Human versus Robot: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Accuracy of Free Hand versus Robotic Guidance for Placement of S2 Alar-Iliac (S2AI) Screws

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective matched cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy of S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw placement by robotic guidance versus free hand technique.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spinopelvic fixation utilizing S2AI screws provides optimal fixation across the lumbosacral junction allowing for solid fusion, especially in long segment fusion constructs. Traditionally, S2AI screw placement has required fluoroscopic guidance for accurate screw placement. Herein, we present the first series comparing a free hand and robotic-guided technique for S2AI screw placement.

METHODS

Sixty-eight consecutive patients who underwent S2AI screw placement by either a free hand or robotic technique between 2015 and 2016 were reviewed. Propensity score-matching was utilized to control for preoperative characteristic imbalances. Screw position and accuracy were evaluated using three-dimensional manipulation of computed tomography scan reconstructions from intraoperative O-arm imaging.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients (105 screws) were matched, 28 (59 screws) in the free hand group (FHG) and 23 (46 screws) in the robot group (RG). The mean age in the FHG and RG were 57.9 ± 14.6 years and 61.6 ± 12.0 years (P = 0.342), respectively. The average caudal angle in the sagittal plane was significantly larger in the RG (31.0 ± 10.0° vs. 25.7 ± 8.8°, P = 0.005). There was no difference between the FHG and RG in the horizontal angle, measured in the axial plane using the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) as a reference (41.1 ± 8.1° vs. 42.8 ± 6.6°, P = 0.225), or the S2AI to S1 screw angle (9.4 ± 7.0° vs. 11.3 ± 9.9°, P = 0.256), respectively. There was no difference in the overall accuracy between FHG and RG (94.9% vs. 97.8%, P = 0.630). Additionally, there were no significant intraoperative neurovascular or visceral complications associated with S2AI screw placement.

CONCLUSION

Free hand and robotic-guided S2AI screw placement both prove to be safe, accurate, and reliable techniques for achieving spinopelvic fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Sacral-Alar-Iliac Fixation in Children with Neuromuscular Scoliosis: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the 5-year outcomes of children with neuromuscular scoliosis treated with sacral-alar-iliac screws.

METHODS

We reviewed clinical and radiographic records of patients aged ≤18 years treated by 1 pediatric orthopedic surgeon for neuromuscular scoliosis with spinal fusion using sacral-alar-iliac pelvic anchors. Thirty-eight patients with a minimum 5-year radiographic follow-up (mean, 6.0 ± 1.2 years) were studied. The mean patient age was 13 ± 2.0 years, and 47% were female. The mean number of levels fused was 18 ± 0.7. Two-thirds (66%) of the patients were diagnosed with cerebral palsy.

RESULTS

Between the preoperative period and final follow-up, the patients exhibited a mean correction of the major coronal curve of 79% (preoperative, 85° to final, 18°) and a mean 57% correction of the pelvic obliquity (preoperative, 16° to final, 7°). Patients maintained the correction of mean pelvic obliquity from the early postoperative period (6°) to final follow-up (7°). Preoperatively, 76% of the patients had a pelvic obliquity of >10°, compared with 26% of patients postoperatively. There were no cases of neurologic or vascular complications or pseudarthrosis. Radiographs revealed bilateral sacral-alar-iliac screw lucency in 8 patients; 4 of these patients had deep wound infections, and the other 4 were asymptomatic. Unilateral screw fracture was found in 1 patient with an 8-mm-diameter screw (1.3%; 1 of 76 screws); the patient was observed and remained asymptomatic. There were no cases of set screw displacement, screw back-out, or rod dislodgement.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacral-alar-iliac screws are safe and effective pelvic anchors for use in children with neuromuscular scoliosis.