Robotic-navigated assistance in spine surgery

Efficacy and safety of navigation robot-assisted versus conventional oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion with internal fixation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: A retrospective study

Effective internal fixation with pedicle screw is a key factor in the success of lumbar fusion with internal fixation. Whether navigation robots can improve the efficacy and safety of screw placement is controversial. Thirty-eight patients who underwent oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion internal fixation from March 2022 to May 2023 were retrospectively analyzed, 16 cases in the navigational robot group and 22 cases in the fluoroscopy group. Using visual analog score (VAS) for the low back and lower limbs, Oswestry Disability Index to compare the clinical efficacy of the 2 groups; using perioperative indexes such as the duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, and postoperative hospital stay to compare the safety of the 2 groups; and using accuracy of pedicle screws (APS) and the facet joint violation (FJV) to compare the accuracy of the 2 groups. Postoperative follow-up at least 6 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in the baseline data (P > .05). The navigational robot group's VAS-back was significantly lower than the fluoroscopy group at 3 days postoperatively (P < .05). However, the differences between the 2 groups in VAS-back at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, and in VAS-leg and Oswestry Disability Index at 3 days, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively were not significant (P > .05). Although duration of surgery in the navigational robot group was significantly longer than in the fluoroscopy group (P > .05), the intraoperative blood loss and the intraoperative fluoroscopy times were significantly lower than in the fluoroscopy group (P < .05). The difference in the PHS between the 2 groups was not significant (P > .05). The APS in the navigation robot group was significantly higher than in the fluoroscopy group, and the rate of FJV was significantly lower than in the fluoroscopy group (P < .05). Compared with the traditional fluoroscopic technique, navigation robot-assisted lumbar interbody fusion with internal fixation provides less postoperative low back pain in the short term, with less trauma, less bleeding, and lower radiation exposure, as well as better APS and lower FJV, resulting in better clinical efficacy and safety.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Comparison of clinical efficacy of robot-assisted and freehand core decompression in the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

At present, the core decompression (CD) has become the main surgical procedure for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH); however, the CD surgery requires high operator experience and repeated fluoroscopy increases the radiation damage to patients, and medical staff. This article compares the clinical efficacy of robot-assisted and freehand CD for ONFH by meta-analysis.

METHODS

Computer searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, WanFang, and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database were conducted from the time of database inception to November 15, 2023. The literature on the clinical efficacy of robot-assisted and freehand CD in the treatment of ONFH was collected. Two researchers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and strictly evaluated the quality of the included literature. Outcome measures encompassed operative duration, intraoperative blood loss volume, frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopies, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Harris hip score (HHS), complications, and radiographic progression. Data synthesis was carried out using Review Manager 5.4.1 software. The quality of evidence was evaluated according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) standards.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective cohort studies involving 355 patients were included in the study. The results of meta-analysis showed that in the robot-assisted group, the operative duration (MD = -17.60, 95% CI: -23.41 to -11.78, P < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss volume (MD = -19.98, 95% CI: -28.84 to -11.11, P < 0.001), frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopies (MD = -6.60, 95% CI: -9.01 to -4.20, P < 0.001), and ΔVAS score (MD = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.67 to -0.22, P < 0.001) were significantly better than those in the freehand group. The GRADE evidence evaluation showed ΔVAS score as low quality and other indicators as very low quality. There was no significant difference in the terms of ΔHHS (MD = 0.51, 95% CI: -1.34 to 2.35, P = 0.59), complications (RR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.03 to 2.74, P = 0.29), and radiographic progression (RR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.02, P = 0.06) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence showing the benefit of robot-assisted therapy for treatment of ONFH patients, and much of it is of low quality. Therefore, caution should be exercised in interpreting these results. It is recommended that more high-quality studies be conducted to validate these findings in future studies.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ #recordDetails, CRD42023420593.

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

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

Prospective Comparison of Two Robotically Navigated Pedicle Screw Instrumentation Techniques

This study aimed to compare screw accuracy and incidence of skive between two robotically navigated instrumented techniques in posterior spine fusion surgery: manual anti-skive instrumentation with an anti-skive cannula (ASC) and the use of a navigated, high-speed drill (HSD). Over a 3-year period, consecutive patients are undergoing RNA posterior fusion surgery with either ASC (n = 53) or HSD (n = 63). Both groups met a value of approximately 292 screws in our analysis (296 ASC, 294 HSD), which was determined by a biostatistician at an academic institution. Screw accuracy and skive was analyzed using preoperative CT and intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) fluoroscopy. Among 590 planned robotically inserted pedicle screws (296 ASC, 294 HSD), 245 ASC screws (82.8%) and 283 HSD screws (96.3%) were successfully inserted (p < 0.05). Skive events occurred in 4/283 (1.4%) HSD screws and 15/245 (6.2%) ASC screws (p < 0.05). HSD screws showed better accuracy in the axial and sagittal planes, being closer to planned trajectories in all directions except cranial deviation (p < 0.05). Additionally, HSD had a significantly lower time per screw (1.9 ± 1.0 min) compared to ASC (3.2 ± 2.0 min, p < 0.001). No adverse clinical effects were observed. The HSD technique showed significant improvements in time and screw accuracy compared to ASC. Biplanar fluoroscopy and 3D imaging resulted in significantly lower radiation exposure and time compared to ASC. These significant findings in the HSD group may be attributed to the lower occurrence of malpositioned screws, leading to a decrease in the need for second authentication. This represents a notable iterative improvement of the RNA platform.

Assessment of the Efficacy of Low-Density Pedicle Screw Construction Correction of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Prospective Single-Center Study

Background Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) poses physical and psychological challenges for affected individuals, necessitating effective and less invasive treatment approaches. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of low-density posterior pedicle screw fixation in AIS correction, exploring its impact on deformity parameters, patient quality of life, and potential complications. Methodology A prospective study involving 20 AIS patients, employing low-density pedicle screw fixation, was conducted. Clinical, radiological, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22) outcomes were assessed. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 26 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results Significant reductions in major and minor curve Cobb angles were observed (mean major curve reduction: 79.14%, p < 0.001; mean minor curve reduction: 68.91%, p < 0.001), indicating substantial deformity correction. As measured by the SRS-22 questionnaire, quality of life showed noteworthy improvements (mean pain score increase: 0.54, p < 0.05; mean self-image score increase: 1.22, p < 0.01), reflecting enhanced patient satisfaction and well-being. Complications were documented in four (20%) cases, including infection, adding-on phenomenon, proximal junctional kyphosis, and thoracic hypokyphosis. Conclusions Our study highlights the efficacy of low-density pedicle screw constructs in AIS correction. Significant deformity reductions and improved quality of life underscore the success of the approach. However, long-term studies with larger cohorts are crucial for confirming durability.