2019
DOI: 10.1002/rcs.2032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accuracy of the robot‐assisted procedure in deep brain stimulation

Abstract: Introduction:The use of a robot-assisted technology becomes very competitive.The aim of this work was to define the accuracy of robotic assistance in deep brain stimulation surgery and to compare results with that in the literature. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed the accuracy of lead implantation in 24 consecutive patients who had robot-assisted (ROSA, Zimmer-Biomet) surgery for the treatment of movement disorders. Intended stereotactic coordinates (x, y, z) of contact 0 (the most distal contact at the ti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Dlaka et al reporting 32 biopsy surgeries by the RONNA G3 robot calculated an entry point error of 1.42 ± 0.74 mm and target point error of 1.95 ± 1.11 mm ( 18 ). In addition, Alice Goia et al reported 44 lead implantations using the ROSA robot for deep brain stimulation surgery, observing target errors of 0.81 ± 0.51 mm on the right and 1.12 ± 0.75 mm on the left ( 19 ). This indicates that the accuracy of this study's Remebot-assisted biopsy procedure is comparable to that of other available robots, with a mean entry point error was 0.99 and a mean target error as low as 1.13 mm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dlaka et al reporting 32 biopsy surgeries by the RONNA G3 robot calculated an entry point error of 1.42 ± 0.74 mm and target point error of 1.95 ± 1.11 mm ( 18 ). In addition, Alice Goia et al reported 44 lead implantations using the ROSA robot for deep brain stimulation surgery, observing target errors of 0.81 ± 0.51 mm on the right and 1.12 ± 0.75 mm on the left ( 19 ). This indicates that the accuracy of this study's Remebot-assisted biopsy procedure is comparable to that of other available robots, with a mean entry point error was 0.99 and a mean target error as low as 1.13 mm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The initial search identified 625 publications, whereas after application of language filter 436 studies remained. A total of 25 full-text papers reporting the use of intraoperative imaging in DBS surgery matched the inclusion criteria [7,8,14,18,19,21,22,24,28,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46]. Data reported in this study were included for qualitative and quantitative analysis, totaling 26 papers.…”
Section: Intraoperative Image In Dbs Surgery: Systematic Review Of Thmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 1994, Maciunas et al reported on more than 21,500 independent accuracy test measurements of a test phantom made with 11,000 computed tomography (CT) images and employing four commonly used stereotactic devices: the Brown-Roberts-Wells (BRW) frame, the Cosman-Roberts-Wells (CRW) frame, the Kelly-Goers Compass frame, and the Leksell frame (Table 1) [8]. In recent years, several groups have reported on inaccuracies during DBS procedures, including groups employing frameless systems and robot-assisted procedures (Table 1) [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. On the basis of these results, one should take into account the possibility of a 3D inaccuracy of up to 2 mm of the applied stereotactic technique when targeting the dorsolateral STN, underlining the need for intraoperative imaging to verify lead localization.…”
Section: Accuracy Of the Stereotactic Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%