Radiological and clinical differences between robotic-assisted pedicle screw fixation with and without real-time optical tracking

Hao, Dingjun; Gao, Lin; Huang, Dageng; Shan, Lequn; Wang, Wentao; Fan, Yong; Hao, Dingjun; Yan, Liang

doi:10.1007/s00586-020-06641-y

Cited by 6 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, patients operated on with the TINAVI system were noted to have less pedicle screw surgical revisions as compared with patients operated with Renaissance (p < 0.05). 31 From our meta-regression, our results similarly suggest a benefit of accuracy from the addition of an optical lens and multijointed robotic arm. Within the old generation, Ringel et al appeared as an outlier as this study with reported skidding due to the use of only one K-wire.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

“…Papers concerning the old generation robots include nine studies utilizing SpineAssist 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 and seven utilizing Renaissance. 12 27 28 29 30 31 32 In terms of the new generation of robots, two studies focused on Mazor X, 33 34 five about ExcelsiusGPS, 35 36 37 38 39 eight about TINAVI, 4 5 7 40 41 42 43 44 and one about ROSA Spine. 3 Three papers pooled patients treated either with open surgery or minimally invasive surgery as one cohort.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12,25,29,32 Postoperative complications included four wound infections, two neurological complications, two cage dislodgements, two unspecified issues, one case of spinal cord stroke, and one case of bowel obstruction with renal injury. 12,25,[30][31][32] Newer generation of robots was intraoperatively associated with two dural tears, one case of K-wire skidding, and two unspecified issues. 5,39,43 Postoperative complications included five cases of muscle numbness of anterior thigh, five wound revisions, two 30-day readmissions, one seroma, one infection, and one unspecified reason.…”

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indications for pedicle screw placement included degenerative disc disease (n ¼ 724), fracture/trauma (n ¼ 56), Scoliosis (n ¼ 3), and infection (n ¼ 1). 5,7,12,25,27,[30][31][32][33][36][37][38]42,43 Overall average age was 60 AE 5 years, with the old generation group individually averaging 61 AE 5 years and the new generation robots group averaging 60 AE 5 years. Upon unpaired t-test comparison, no significant significance of age mean of means was found (t(25) ¼ 0.6, p ¼ 0.59).…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Comparison of Spinal Robotic Systems and Pedicle Screw Accuracy Rates: Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The motivation to improve accuracy and reduce complication rates in spinal surgery has driven great advancements in robotic surgical systems, with the primary difference between the newer generation and older generation models being the presence of an optical camera and multijointed arm. This study compares accuracy and complication rates of pedicle screw placement in older versus newer generation robotic systems reported in the literature. Methods We performed a systemic review and meta-analysis describing outcomes of pedicle screw placement with robotic spine surgery. We assessed the robustness of these findings by quantifying levels of cross-study heterogeneity and publication bias. Finally, we performed meta-regression to test for associations between pedicle screw accuracy and older versus newer generation robotic spine system usage. Results Average pedicle screw placement accuracy rates for old and new generation robotic platforms were 97 and 99%, respectively. Use of new generation robots was significantly associated with improved pedicle screw placement accuracy (p = 0.03). Conclusion Accuracy of pedicle screw placement was high across all generations of robotic surgical systems. However, newer generation robots were shown to be significantly associated with accurate pedicle screw placement, showing the benefits of upgrading robotic systems with a real-time optical camera and multijointed arm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Comparison of Spinal Robotic Systems and Pedicle Screw Accuracy Rates: Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The TiRobot system that we used was a multi-indication, real-time, image-guided orthopaedic surgical robot approved by China in 2016. So far, several literature have been published to evaluate the accuracy and clinical outcomes with utilization of orthopaedic robot in posterior cervical surgery and thoracolumbar surgery [14,[27][28][29]. At present, there is an increasing number of studies focusing on the combination of robot with MIS-TLIF technique in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease [16][17][18][19]26,30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective matched-control analysis for clinical and quality-of-life outcomes

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To compare the screw accuracy and clinical outcomes between robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (RA MIS-TLIF) and open TLIF in the treatment of one-level lumbar degenerative disease. Materials & methods: From May 2018 to December 2019, a consecutive series of patients undergoing robot-assisted minimally invasive one-level lumbar fusion procedures were retrospectively compared with matched controls who underwent one-level open TLIF procedures for clinical and quality-of-life outcomes. Results: A total of 52 patients underwent RA MIS-TLIF procedures (robot-assisted [RA] group) and 52 matched controls received freehand open TLIF procedures (open [OP] group). The RA group had more grade A screws with 96.2% one-time success rate of screw placement (p < 0.05). Besides, the RA group experienced less intraoperative blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay, while the OP group had shorter operative duration and cumulative radiation time (p < 0.001). What is more, the average VAS score for low back pain and ODI score in the RA group were lower than that in the OP group 1 month after operation (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The use of real-time, image-guided robot system may further expand the advantages of MIS-TLIF technique in terms of accuracy and safety.

show abstract

Robotics in spine surgery: systematic review of literature

Lopez

Benzakour²,

Mavrogenis

et al. 2022

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiological and clinical differences between robotic-assisted pedicle screw fixation with and without real-time optical tracking

Cited by 6 publications

References 28 publications

A Comparison of Spinal Robotic Systems and Pedicle Screw Accuracy Rates: Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

A Comparison of Spinal Robotic Systems and Pedicle Screw Accuracy Rates: Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

Robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective matched-control analysis for clinical and quality-of-life outcomes

Robotics in spine surgery: systematic review of literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About