Accuracy of Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Insertion in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Is Triggered Electromyographic Pedicle Screw Stimulation Necessary?

Abstract

Background: Screw malpositioning is an identifiable cause of intraoperative neurophysiologic changes.Although triggered screw electromyography (t-EMG) has been found to exhibit high sensitivity for identifying malpositioned screws, no previous study has assessed the utility of combining t-EMG with robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement for identifying malpositioned screws. We sought to evaluate the utility of t-EMG used in combination with robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement for identifying malpositioned screws in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).Methods: Patients undergoing robotic-assisted posterior spinal fusion with pedicle screw fixation for AIS underwent retrospective review from a single surgeons prospectively collected database. Preoperative demographic data and curve characteristics were recorded. Computed tomography (CT) scans were reviewed, measuring pedicle width and classifying pedicle morphology using the channel classification system. Pedicle data was compared against intra-operative t-EMG data, with a minimal threshold of 8 mA used for screw removal and screw path examination and the rate of screw re-direction recorded. All pedicle screws were verified using image intensification.Results: Forty-nine patients (11 males, 38 females, average age 14.49 years) with an average curve magnitude of 51 degrees and placement of 844 pedicle screws to attain an average curve correction of 67.7%. The incidence of an absent pedicle (type C or D morphology) was 2%. Overall, 24 screws (2.8%) were identified with an abnormal t-EMG threshold. All screws were found to have an intact medial wall upon probing and were reinserted without re-direction. No patient or curve characteristic was predictive of abnormal t-EMG amplitude but smaller pedicles correlated with smaller amplitudes.Conclusions: With precise pre-operative planning, robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement has shown to be a safe and effective method in treating AIS patients as shown by the lack of medial pedicle breach and malpositioned screws. We found no evidence to support combined use of t-EMG for identifying medially malpositioned screws.

Surgeons' Learning Curve of Renaissance Robotic Surgical System

“…9,19 As all studies concluded, the robot assisted pedicle screw placement is a safe and effective technique and is also cost-effective. [20][21][22] In our cohort, the robot-assisted spine surgery was scheduled in 62 cases; however, only in 46 patients (74.2%) was it used due to system setup failure. This was caused due to registration in 1 patient, installation process in 13 cases, software bug in 1 case or placement in another patient.…”

Uniplanar cannulated pedicle screws in the correction of Lenke type 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)

“…In order to reduce the misplacement of pedicle screws in AIS, extra-pedicle screws [20], PPSs, cannulate pedicle screws [8], intraoperative navigation, robot-assisted pedicle screws [21] and 3D-printing drill guide template [22] have been developed. Recently, some studies have reported the clinical use of cannulated pedicle screws.…”

Diagnostic accuracy of perioperative electromyography in the positioning of pedicle screws in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treatment: a cross-sectional diagnostic study

“…Only one patient was classified as having a threshold ≤8 mA was defined as abnormal and underwent screw re-direction, but underwent screw removal and probing of the pedicle track using a ball-tip probe. This information has been clarified in the text for better understanding [20].…”

“…Pedicle screw misplaced rates using conventional techniques ranged from 5 to 41% in the lumbar spine and from 3 to 55% in the thoracic spine [18,19], with an estimated 1% rate of neurologic complication. Triggered screw electromyography (t-EMG) has been used to help identify misplaced screws, with threshold stimulation varying based upon the spinal segment tested (lumbar versus thoracic), location within the curve (apical versus non-apical) and laterality with regard to the curve (concavity versus convexity) [20,21].…”

“…Motor evoked potentials, somatosensory evoked potentials, free-running electromyography (EMG) and stimulated EMG can be used as monitoring techniques. Furthermore, stimulated EMG can be applied directly to the inserted screws [20].…”