Category: Robotics

Posted on

Robotic‑assisted single‑position lateral for multilevel circumferential lumbar interbody fusion

Acta Neurochirurgica (2023) 165:3963–3967

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion supplemented with insertion of pedicle screws is a surgical procedure that has gained popularity in the last years, becoming an important tool in the armamentarium of spine surgeons. In recent years, there is a trend to complete both procedures in a single position, thus avoiding flipping the patient prone to insert the pedicle screws. Methods

We describe a step-by-step workflow of the robotic-assisted technique for multilevel lateral lumbar interbody fusion supplemented with posterior instrumentation. The surgical procedure is performed in a single lateral position. For access to L4–5 or L5–S1, an oblique abdominal incision is performed in the same position, and the desired disc space is approached through an oblique or anterior corridor in the retroperitoneal space.

Conclusion Robotic-assisted single-position lateral for multilevel circumferential lumbar interbody fusion is a safe and effective procedure in patients where lumbar stabilization is required. This technique provides patients with a faster recovery and low risk of complications.

Posted on

Impact of landmark crater creation on improving accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in robot-assisted scoliosis surgery

European Spine Journal (2024) 33:4730–4739

This study evaluated the impact of the Landmark Crater (LC) method on pedicle perforation rates in robot-guided surgery for pediatric scoliosis for each pedicle diameter.

Methods Seventy-six scoliosis patients underwent robot-assisted posterior spinal fusion. The cohort consisted of 19 male and 57 female patients, with a mean ± standard deviation age of 17.5 ± 7.7 years and a preoperative Cobb angle of 57.0 ± 18.5°. The LC method is a method in which craters that serves as a landmark are created in advance at the planned PS insertion site of all pedicles within the intraoperative CT imaging area. The patients were divided into the LC group, in which PS insertion was performed using the LC method, and the control group using the conventional PS insertion method. Overall and pedicle perforation rates for each pedicle outer diameter were compared between the groups by Fisher’s exact test.

Results The LC group exhibited a significantly lower pedicle major perforation rate than did the control group (2.7% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.001). The perforation rates in pedicles with a pedicle outer diameter > 6 mm, 4–6 mm, 2–4 mm, and < 2 mm were 0.61%, 1.6%, 5.1%, and 21%, in the LC group and 0.75%, 4.1%, 12%, and 50% in the control group, respectively.

Conclusion In robot-assisted surgery for pediatric scoliosis, the LC method enabled significantly lower pedicle perforation rates over the conventional method. Both the LC and conventional methods exhibited higher perforation rates for smaller pedicle diameters.

Posted on

Comparison of accuracy, revision, and perioperative outcomes in robot-assisted spine surgeries: systematic review and meta-analysis

J Neurosurg Spine 41:519–531, 2024

Pedicle screw placement guidance is critical in spinal fusions, and spinal surgery robots aim to improve accuracy and reduce complications. Current literature has yet to compare the relative merits of available robotic systems. In this review, the authors aimed to 1) assess the current state of spinal robotics literature; 2) conduct a meta-analysis of robotic performance based on accuracy, speed, and safety; and 3) offer recommendations for robotic system selection.

METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, the authors conducted a systematic literature review across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus as of April 28, 2022, for studies on approved robots for placing lumbar pedicle screws. Three reviewers screened and extracted data relating to the study characteristics, accuracy rate, intraoperative revisions, and reoperations. Secondary performance metrics included operative time, blood loss, and radiation exposure. The authors statistically compared the performance of the robots using a random-effects model to account for variation within and between the studies. Each robot was also compared with performance benchmarks of traditional techniques including freehand, fluoroscopic, and CT-navigated insertion. Finally, we performed a Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill test to assess for the presence of publication bias.

RESULTS The authors identified 46 studies, describing 4670 patients and 25,054 screws, that evaluated 4 different robotic systems: Mazor X, ROSA, ExcelsiusGPS, and Cirq. The weighted accuracy rates of Gertzbein-Robbins classification grade A or B screws were as follows: ExcelsiusGPS, 98.0%; ROSA, 98.0%; Mazor, 98.2%; and Cirq, 94.2%. No robot was significantly more accurate than the others. However, the accuracy of the ExcelsiusGPS was significantly higher than that of traditional methods, and the accuracies of the Mazor and ROSA were significantly higher than that of fluoroscopy. The intraoperative revision rates were Cirq, 0.55%; ROSA, 0.91%; Mazor, 0.98%; and ExcelsiusGPS, 1.08%. The reoperation rates were Cirq, 0.28%; ExcelsiusGPS, 0.32%; and Mazor, 0.76% (no reoperations were reported for ROSA). Operative times were similar for all robots. Both the ExcelsiusGPS and Mazor were associated with significantly less blood loss than the ROSA. The Cirq had the lowest radiation exposure. Robots tended to be more accurate and generally their use was associated with fewer reoperations and less blood loss than freehand, fluoroscopic, or CT-navigated techniques.

CONCLUSIONS Robotic platforms perform comparably based on key metrics, with high accuracy rates and low intraoperative revision and reoperation rates. The spinal robotics publication rate will continue to accelerate, and choosing a robot will depend on the context of the practice.

Posted on

Robot‑assisted transcerebellar stereotactic approach for brainstem lesion

Acta Neurochirurgica (2024) 166:389

Stereotactic approaches to diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPGs) remain essential due to advances in molecular biology and management, necessitating tissue sampling. Here we present an effective technique with a biopsy by robot-assisted transcerebellar approach.

Method Our procedure was performed using the ROSA robotic system and the OARM CT scan, which provided stereotactic conditions for this transcerebellar approach to brainstem lesions.

Conclusion The robot-assisted transcerebellar stereotactic approach remains essential to provide complications for biopsy of brainstem lesions.

Posted on

Posterolateral lumbar spine fixation and decompression with navigation interfaced with a robotic exoscope with head mounted display

Acta Neurochirurgica (2024) 166:342

Lumbar spine fixation and fusion is currently performed with intraoperative tools such as intraoperative CT scan integrated to navigation system to provide accurate and safe positioning of the screws. The use of microscopic visualization systems enhances visualization and accuracy during decompression of the spinal canal as well.

Methods We introduce a novel setting in microsurgical decompression and fusion of lumbar spine using an exoscope with robotized arm (RoboticScope) interfaced with navigation and head mounted displays.

Conclusion Spinal canal decompression and fusion can effectively be performed with RoboticScope, with significant advantages especially regarding ergonomics.

Posted on

What is the Marginal Cost of Using Robot Assistance or Navigation for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Time-Driven Activity-Based Cost Analysis

Neurosurgery 95:556–565, 2024

Our primary objective was to compare the marginal intraoperative cost of 3 different methods for pedicle screw placement as part of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIFs). Specifically, we used time-driven activity-based costing to compare costs between robot-assisted TLIF (RA-TLIF), TLIF with intraoperative navigation (ION-TLIF), and freehand (non-navigated, nonrobotic) TLIF.

METHODS: Total cost was divided into direct and indirect costs. We identified all instances of RA-TLIF (n = 20), ION-TLIF (n = 59), and freehand TLIF (n = 233) from 2020 to 2022 at our institution. Software was developed to automate the extraction of all intraoperatively used personnel and material resources from the electronic medical record. Total costs were determined through a combination of direct observation, electronic medical record extraction, and interdepartmental collaboration (business operations, sterile processing, pharmacy, and plant operation departments). Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to compare costs between TLIF modalities, accounting for patient-specific factors as well as number of levels fused, surgeon, and hospital site.

RESULTS: The average total intraoperative cost per case for the RA-TLIF, ION-TLIF, and freehand TLIF cohorts was $24 838 ± $10 748, $15 991 ± $6254, and $14 498 ± $6580, respectively. Regression analysis revealed that RA-TLIF had significantly higher intraoperative cost compared with both ION-TLIF ( β -coefficient: $7383 ± $1575, P < .001) and freehand TLIF ( β -coefficient: $8182 ± $1523, P < .001). These cost differences were primarily driven by supply cost. However, there were no significant differences in intraoperative cost between ION-TLIF and freehand TLIF (P = .32).

CONCLUSION: We demonstrate a novel use of time-driven activity-based costing methodology to compare different modalities for executing the same type of lumbar fusion procedure. RA-TLIF entails significantly higher supply cost when compared with other modalities, which explains its association with higher total intraoperative cost. The use of ION, however, does not add extra expense compared with freehand TLIF when accounting for confounders. This might have implications as surgeons and hospitals move toward bundled payments.

Posted on

Surgical Characteristics of Intracranial Biopsy Using a Frameless Stereotactic Robotic Platform: A Single-Center Experience

Operative Neurosurgery 26:502–510, 2024

Cranial robotics are a burgeoning field of neurosurgery. To date, all cranial robotic systems described have been computerized, arm-based instruments that take up significant space in the operating room. The Medtronic Stealth Autoguide robot has a smaller operating room footprint and offers multiaxial, frame-based surgical targeting. The authors set out to define the surgical characteristics of a novel robotic platform for brain biopsy in a large patient cohort.

METHODS: Patients who underwent stereotactic biopsy using the Stealth Autoguide cranial robotic platform from July 2020 to March 2023 were included in this study. Clinical, surgical, and histological data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS: Ninety-six consecutive patients (50 female, 46 male) were included. The mean age at biopsy was 53.7 ± 18.0 years. The mean target depth was 68.2 ± 15.3 mm. The biopsy diagnostic tissue acquisition rate was 100%. The mean time from incision to biopsy tissue acquisition was 15.4 ± 9.9 minutes. Target lesions were located throughout the brain: in the frontal

lobe (n = 32, 33.3%), parietal lobe (n = 21, 21.9%), temporal lobe (n = 22, 22.9%), deep brain nuclei/thalamus (n = 13, 13.5%),

cerebellum (n = 7, 7.3%), and brainstem (n = 1, 1.0%). Most cases were gliomas (n = 75, 78.2%). Patients were discharged home on postoperative day 0 or 1 in 62.5% of cases. A total of 7 patients developed postoperative complications (7.2%).

CONCLUSION: This cranial robotic platform can be used for efficient, safe, and accurate cranial biopsies that allow for reliable diagnosis of intracranial pathology in a minimally invasive setting.

Posted on

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Asleep Single-Stage Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery

Operative Neurosurgery 26:363–371, 2024

Robotic assistance has garnered increased use in neurosurgery. Recently, this has expanded to include deep brain stimulation (DBS). Several studies have reported increased accuracy and improved efficiency with robotic assistance, but these are limited to individual robotic platforms with smaller sample sizes or are broader studies on robotics not specific to DBS. Our objectives are to report our technique for robot-assisted, minimally invasive, asleep, single-stage DBS surgery and to perform a meta-analysis comparing techniques from previous studies.

METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review of DBS procedures using a floor-mounted robot with a frameless transient fiducial array registration. We compiled accuracy data (radial entry error, radial target error, and 3dimensional target error) and efficiency data (operative time, setup time, and total procedure time). We then performed a meta-analysis of previous studies and compared these metrics.

RESULTS: We analyzed 315 electrodes implanted in 160 patients. The mean radial target error was 0.9 ± 0.5 mm, mean target 3-dimensional error was 1.3 ± 0.7 mm, and mean radial entry error was 1.1 ± 0.8 mm. The mean procedure time (including pulse generator placement) was 182.4 ± 47.8 minutes, and the mean setup time was 132.9 ± 32.0 minutes. The overall complication rate was 8.8% (2.5% hemorrhagic/ischemic, 2.5% infectious, and 0.6% revision). Our meta-analysis showed increased accuracy with floor-mounted over skull-mounted robotic platforms and with fiducial-based registrations over optical registrations.

CONCLUSION: Our technique for robot-assisted, minimally invasive, asleep, single-stage DBS surgery is safe, accurate, and efficient. Our data, combined with a meta-analysis of previous studies, demonstrate that robotic assistance can provide similar or increased accuracy and improved efficiency compared with traditional frame-based techniques. Our analysis also suggests that floor-mounted robots and fiducial-based registration methods may be more accurate.

 

Posted on

Robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement accuracy compared with alternative guidance in lateral single-position surgery

J Neurosurg Spine 39:443–451, 2023

While single-position surgery (SPS) eliminates the need for patient repositioning, the placement of screws in the unconventional lateral position poses unique challenges related to asymmetry relative to the surgical table. Use of robotic guidance or intraoperative navigation can help to overcome this. The aim of this study was to compare the relative accuracies offered by these various navigation modalities for pedicle screws placed in lateral SPS.

METHODS According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies reporting pedicle screw placement accuracy using fluoroscopic, CT-navigated, O-arm, or robotic guidance in lateral SPS, and a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Included studies all compared evaluated screw placement accuracy in lateral SPS using a single navigation method. Quality assessment was performed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system; risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. The primary outcome, rate of pedicle screw breach, was analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS Eleven studies were included comprising 548 patients who underwent the placement of instrumentation with 2488 screws. For the fluoroscopic, CT-navigated, O-arm, and robotic guidance cohorts, there were 3, 2, 3, and 3 studies, respectively. Breach rates by modality were as follows: fluoroscopic guidance (6.6%), CT navigation (4.7%), O-arm (3.9%), and robotic guidance (3.9%). Random-effects meta-analysis showed a significant difference between studies, with an overall breach rate of 4.9% (95% CI 3.1%–7.5%; p < 0.001); however, testing for subgroup differences failed to show a significant difference between guidance modalities (Q M = 0.69, df = 3; p = 0.88). Heterogeneity between studies was significant (I 2 = 79.0%, τ 2 = 0.41, χ 2 = 47.65, df = 10; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS Robotic guidance of screws is noninferior to alternative guidance modalities in lateral SPS; however, additional prospective studies directly comparing different guidance types are merited.

Posted on

Retrospective single-surgeon study of prone versus lateral robotic pedicle screw placement: a CT-based assessment of accuracy

J Neurosurg Spine 39:490–497, 2023

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion including anterior-to-psoas oblique lumbar interbody fusion has conventionally relied on pedicle screw placement (PSP) for construct stabilization. Single-position surgery with lumbar interbody fusion in the lateral decubitus position with concomitant PSP has been associated with increased operative efficiency. What remains unclear is the accuracy of PSP with robotic guidance when compared with the more familiar prone patient positioning. The present study aimed to compare robot-assisted screw placement accuracy between patients with instrumentation placed in the prone and lateral positions.

METHODS The authors identified all consecutive patients treated with interbody fusion and PSP in the prone or lateral position by a single surgeon between January 2019 and October 2022. All pedicle screws placed were analyzed using CT scans to determine appropriate positioning according to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification grading system (grade C or worse was considered as a radiographically significant breach). Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to identify risk factors for the occurrence of a radiographically significant breach.

RESULTS Eighty-nine consecutive patients (690 screws) were included, of whom 46 (477 screws) were treated in the prone position and 43 (213 screws) in the lateral decubitus position. There were fewer breaches in the prone (n = 13, 2.7%) than the lateral decubitus (n = 15, 7.0%) group (p = 0.012). Nine (1.9%) radiographically significant breaches occurred in the prone group compared with 10 (4.7%) in the lateral decubitus group (p = 0.019), for a prone versus lateral decubitus PSP accuracy rate of 98.1% versus 95.3%. There were no significant differences in BMI between prone versus lateral decubitus cohorts (30.1 vs 29.6) or patients with screw breach versus those without (31.2 vs 29.5). In multivariate models, the prone position was the only significant protective factor for screw accuracy; no other significant risk factors for screw breach were identified.

CONCLUSIONS The present data suggest that pedicle screws placed with robotic assistance have higher placement accuracy in the prone position. Further studies will be needed to validate the accuracy of PSP in the lateral position as single-position surgery becomes more commonplace in the treatment of spinal disorders.

Posted on

Robot‑assisted endoscopic third ventriculostomy under intraoperative CT imaging guidance

Acta Neurochirurgica (2023) 165:2525–2531

The robot-assisted neurosurgical procedures have recently benefited of the evolution of intraoperative imaging, including mobile CT unit available in the operating room. This facilitated use paved the way to perform more neurosurgical procedures under robotic assistance. Endoscopic third ventriculocisternostomy requires both a safe transcortical trajectory and a smooth manipulation.

Method We describe our technique of robot-assisted endoscopic third ventriculocisternostomy combining robotic assistance and intraoperative CT imaging.

Conclusion Robot-assisted endoscopic third ventriculocisternostomy using modern intraoperative neuroimaging can be easily implemented and prevented erroneous trajectory and abrupt endoscopic movements, reducing surgically induced brain damages.

Posted on

Robotic Instruments Inside the MRI Bore: Key Concepts and Evolving Paradigms in Imaging-enhanced Cranial Neurosurgery

World Neurosurg. (2023) 176:127-139

Intraoperative MRI has been increasingly used to robotically deliver electrodes and catheters into the human brain using a linear trajectory with great clinical success.

Current cranial MR guided robotics do not allow for continuous realtime imaging during the procedure because most surgical instruments are not MR-conditional. MRI guided robotic cranial surgery can achieve its full potential if all the traditional advantages of robotics (such as tremor-filtering, precision motion scaling, etc.) can be incorporated with the neurosurgeon physically present in the MRI bore or working remotely through controlled robotic arms.

The technological limitations of design optimization, choice of sensing, kinematic modeling, physical constraints, and real-time control had hampered early developments in this emerging field, but continued research and development in these areas over time has granted neurosurgeons far greater confidence in using cranial robotic techniques.

This article elucidates the role of MR-guided robotic procedures using clinical devices like NeuroBlate and Clearpoint that have several thousands of cases operated in a “linear cranial trajectory” and planned clinical trials, such as LAANTERN for MR guided robotics in cranial neurosurgery using LITT and MR-guided putaminal delivery of AAV2 GDNF in Parkinson’s disease. The next logical improvisation would be a steerable curvilinear trajectory in cranial robotics with added DOFs and distal tip dexterity to the neurosurgical tools. Similarly, the novel concept of robotic actuators that are powered, imaged, and controlled by the MRI itself is discussed in this article, with its potential for seamless cranial neurosurgery.

Posted on

Feasibility and Accuracy of Robot-Assisted, Stereotactic Biopsy Using 3-Dimensional Intraoperative Imaging and Frameless Registration Tool

Neurosurgery 92:803–811, 2023

Robot-assisted stereotactic biopsy is evolving: 3-dimensional intraoperative imaging tools and new frameless registration systems are spreading.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy and effectiveness of a new stereotactic biopsy procedure.

METHODS: Observational, retrospective analysis of consecutive robot-assisted stereotactic biopsies using the Neurolocate (Renishaw) frameless registration system and intraoperative O-Arm (Medtronic) performed at a single institution in adults (2019-2021) and comparisonwith a historical series from the same institution (2006-2016) not using the Neurolocate nor the O-Arm.

RESULTS: In 100 patients (55%men), 6.2 ± 2.5 (1-14) biopsy sampleswere obtained at 1.7 ± 0.7 (1-3) biopsy sites. An histomolecular diagnosis was obtained in 96% of cases. The mean duration of the procedure was 59.0 ± 22.3 min. Themean distance between the planned and the actual target was 0.7 ± 0.7 mm. On systematic postoperative computed tomography scans, a hemorrhage ≥10 mm was observed in 8 cases (8%) while pneumocephalus was distant from the biopsy site in 76%. A Karnofsky Performance Status score decrease ≥20 points postoperatively was observed in 4%. The average dose length product was 159.7 ± 63.4mGy cm. Compared with the historical neurosurgical procedure, this newprocedure had similar diagnostic yield (96 vs 98.7%; P = .111) and rate of postoperative disability (4.0 vs 4.2%, P = .914) but was shorter (57.8 ± 22.9 vs 77.8 ± 20.9 min; P < .001) despite older patients.

CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted stereotactic biopsy using the Neurolocate frameless registration system and intraoperative O-Arm is a safe and effective neurosurgical procedure. The accuracy of this robot-assisted surgery supports its effectiveness for daily use in stereotactic neurosurgery.

Posted on

A Retrospective Analysis of Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy Using the ExcelsiusGPS Robotic Guidance System

Operative Neurosurgery 24:242–247, 2023

Robotic guidance has become widespread in spine surgery. Although the intent is improved screw placement, further system-specific data are required to substantiate this intention for pedicle screws in spinal stabilization constructs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of pedicle screws placed with the aid of a robot in a cohort of patients immediately after the adoption of the robot-assisted surgery technique.

METHODS: A retrospective, Institutional Review Board–approved study was performed on the first 100 patients at a single facility, who had undergone spinal surgeries with the use of robotic techniques. Pedicle screw accuracy was graded using the Gertzbein– Robbins Scale based on pedicle wall breach, with grade A representing 0 mm breach and successive grades increasing breach thresholds by 2 mm increments. Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography scans were also used to assess offsets between the objective plan and true screw placements.

RESULTS: A total of 326 screws were analyzed among 72 patients with sufficient imaging data. Ages ranged from 21 to 84 years. The total accuracy rate based on the Gertzbein– Robbins Scale was 97.5%, and the rate for each grade is as follows: A, 82%; B, 15.5%; C, 1.5%; D, 1%; and E, 0. The average tip offset was 1.9 mm, the average tail offset was 2.0 mm, and the average angular offset was 2.6°.

CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted surgery allowed for accurate implantation of pedicle screws on immediate adoption of this technique. There were no complications attributable to the robotic technique, and no hardware revisions were required.

Posted on

Robot-assisted and augmented reality–assisted spinal instrumentation

J Neurosurg Spine 37:299–314, 2022

The use of technology-enhanced methods in spine surgery has increased immensely over the past decade. Here, the authors present the largest systematic review and meta-analysis to date that specifically addresses patient-centered outcomes, including the risk of inaccurate screw placement and perioperative outcomes in spinal surgeries using robotic instrumentation and/or augmented reality surgical navigation (ARSN).

METHODS A systematic review of the literature in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases spanning the last decade (January 2011–November 2021) was performed to present all clinical studies comparing robot-assisted instrumentation and ARSN with conventional instrumentation techniques in lumbar spine surgery. The authors compared these two technologies as they relate to screw accuracy, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative time, length of stay (LOS), perioperative complications, radiation dose and time, and the rate of reoperation.

RESULTS A total of 64 studies were analyzed that included 11,113 patients receiving 20,547 screws. Robot-assisted instrumentation was associated with less risk of inaccurate screw placement (p < 0.0001) regardless of control arm approach (freehand, fluoroscopy guided, or navigation guided), fewer reoperations (p < 0.0001), fewer perioperative complications (p < 0.0001), lower EBL (p = 0.0005), decreased LOS (p < 0.0001), and increased intraoperative time (p = 0.0003). ARSN was associated with decreased radiation exposure compared with robotic instrumentation (p = 0.0091) and fluoroscopy-guided (p < 0.0001) techniques.

CONCLUSIONS Altogether, the pooled data suggest that technology-enhanced thoracolumbar instrumentation is advantageous for both patients and surgeons. As the technology progresses and indications expand, it remains essential to continue investigations of both robotic instrumentation and ARSN to validate meaningful benefit over conventional instrumentation techniques in spine surgery.

Systematic review registration no.: CRD42021283631 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/)

Posted on

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

J Neurosurg Spine 37:112–120, 2022

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

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

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

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

Posted on

Ninety-day complication, revision, and readmission rates for current-generation robot-assisted thoracolumbar spinal fusion surgery

J Neurosurg Spine 36:841–848, 2022

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

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

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

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

 

Posted on

Robotic-Assisted vs Nonrobotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Cost-Utility Analysis

Neurosurgery 90:192–198, 2022

Management of degenerative disease of the spine has evolved to favor minimally invasive techniques, including nonrobotic-assisted and robotic-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Value-based spending is being increasingly implemented to control rising costs in the US healthcare system. With an aging population, it is fundamental to understand which procedure(s) may be most cost-effective.

OBJECTIVE: To compare robotic and nonrobotic MIS-TLIF through a cost-utility analysis.

METHODS: We considered direct medical costs related to surgical intervention and to the hospital stay, as well as 1-yr utilities. We estimated costs by assessing all cases involving adults undergoing robotic surgery at a single institution and an equal number of patients undergoing nonrobotic surgery, matched by demographic and clinical characteristics. We adopted a willingness to pay of $50 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Uncertainty was addressed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS: Costs were estimated based on a total of 76 patients, including 38 undergoing robot-assisted and 38 matched patients undergoing nonrobot MIS-TLIF. Using point estimates, robotic surgery was projected to cost $21 546.80 and to be associated with 0.68 QALY, and nonrobotic surgery was projected to cost $22 398.98 and to be associated with 0.67 QALY. Robotic surgery was found to be more cost-effective strategy, with costeffectiveness being sensitive operating room/materials and room costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis identified robotic surgery as cost-effective in 63% of simulations.

CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that at a willingness to pay of $50 000/QALY, robotic assisted MIS-TLIF was cost-effective in 63% of simulations. Cost-effectiveness depends on operating room and room (admission) costs, with potentially different results under distinct neurosurgical practices.

Posted on

Collaborative spinal robot system for laminectomy: a preliminary study

Neurosurg Focus 52 (1):E11, 2022

The application of robots in the field of pedicle screw placement has achieved great success. However, decompressive laminectomy, a step that is just as critical as pedicle screw placement, does not have a mature robot-assisted system. To address this lack, the authors designed a collaborative spine robot system to assist with laminectomy. In this study, they aimed to investigate the reliability of this novel collaborative spinal robot system and compare it with manual laminectomy (ML).

METHODS Thirty in vitro porcine lumbar vertebral specimens were obtained as experimental bone specimens. Robot-assisted laminectomy (RAL) was performed on the left side of the lamina (n = 30) and ML was performed on the right side (n = 30). The time required for laminectomy on one side, whether the lamina was penetrated, and the remaining thickness of the lamina were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS The time required for laminectomy on one side was longer in the RAL group than in the ML group (median 326 seconds [IQR 133 seconds] vs 108.5 seconds [IQR 43 seconds], p < 0.001). In the RAL group, complete lamina penetration occurred twice (6.7%), while in the ML group, it occurred 9 times (30%); the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.045). There was no statistically significant difference in the remaining lamina thickness between the two groups (median 1.035 mm [IQR 0.419 mm] vs 1.084 mm [IQR 0.383 mm], p = 0.842).

CONCLUSIONS The results of this study confirm the safety of this novel spinal robot system for laminectomy. However, its efficiency requires further improvement.

Posted on

Three-dimensional assessment of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement accuracy and instrumentation reliability based on a preplanned trajectory

J Neurosurg Spine 33:519–528, 2020

Robotic spine surgery systems are increasingly used in the US market. As this technology gains traction, however, it is necessary to identify mechanisms that assess its effectiveness and allow for its continued improvement. One such mechanism is the development of a new 3D grading system that can serve as the foundation for error-based learning in robot systems. Herein the authors attempted 1) to define a system of providing accuracy data along all three pedicle screw placement axes, that is, cephalocaudal, mediolateral, and screw long axes; and 2) to use the grading system to evaluate the mean accuracy of thoracolumbar pedicle screws placed using a single commercially available robotic system.

METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed a prospectively maintained, IRB-approved database of patients at a single tertiary care center who had undergone instrumented fusion of the thoracic or lumbosacral spine using robotic assistance. Patients with preoperatively planned screw trajectories and postoperative CT studies were included in the final analysis. Screw accuracy was measured as the net deviation of the planned trajectory from the actual screw trajectory in the mediolateral, cephalocaudal, and screw long axes.

RESULTS The authors identified 47 patients, 51% male, whose pedicles had been instrumented with a total of 254 screws (63 thoracic, 191 lumbosacral). The patients had a mean age of 61.1 years and a mean BMI of 30.0 kg/m2. The mean screw tip accuracies were 1.3 ± 1.3 mm, 1.2 ± 1.1 mm, and 2.6 ± 2.2 mm in the mediolateral, cephalocaudal, and screw long axes, respectively, for a net linear deviation of 3.6 ± 2.3 mm and net angular deviation of 3.6° ± 2.8°. According to the Gertzbein-Robbins grading system, 184 screws (72%) were classified as grade A and 70 screws (28%) as grade B. Placement of 100% of the screws was clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS The accuracy of the discussed robotic spine system is similar to that described for other surgical systems. Additionally, the authors outline a new method of grading screw placement accuracy that measures deviation in all three relevant axes. This grading system could provide the error signal necessary for unsupervised machine learning by robotic systems, which would in turn support continued improvement in instrumentation placement accuracy.

 

Proudly powered by WordPress