Percutaneous placement of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine using a bone mounted miniature robotic system: first experiences and accuracy of screw placement
- PMID: 19214099
- DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318191ed32
Percutaneous placement of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine using a bone mounted miniature robotic system: first experiences and accuracy of screw placement
Abstract
Study design: A prospective analysis.
Objective: The idea of this study was to evaluate a new miniature robotic system providing passive guidance for pedicle screw placement at the lumbar spine. Special focus was laid on the postoperative accuracy of screw placement.
Summary and background data: Recent technical developments lead to a minimization of pedicle screw fixation techniques. However, the use of navigational techniques is still under controversy.
Methods: Patients selected for a minimal invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion received a spiral computer tomographic scan before surgery. The miniature hexapod robot was mounted to the spinous process and the system moves to the exact entry point according to the trajectory of the surgeon's preoperative plan. After minimal invasive screw placement all patients received routinely a postoperative spiral computer tomographic scan. Screws placed exactly within the pedicle were evaluated as group A, screws deviating <2 mm were evaluated as group B, > or =2 mm to <4 mm (group C); > or =4 mm to <6 mm (group D); and more than 6 mm (group E).
Results: Thirty-one patients received a PLIF with percutaneous posterior pedicle screw insertion using the bone mounted miniature robotic device. A total of 133 pedicle screws were placed. The majority of the screws were placed in L5 (58 screws; 43.6%). In axial plane, 91.7% of the screws were evaluated as group A and 6.8% were evaluated as group B. In longitudinal plane, 81.2% of the screws were evaluated as group A and 9.8% were evaluated as group B. In 1 screw (L5 right) the postoperative evaluation was done as group C (axial plane) and D (longitudinal plane). In 29/31 cases the integration of the miniature robotic system was successful.
Conclusion: In our study the first clinical assessment of a new bone mounted robot system guiding percutaneous pedicle screw placement was done. A deviation <2 mm to the surgeon 's plan in 91.0% to 98.5% verifies the system's accuracy.
Comment on
-
Point of view.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Feb 15;34(4):399. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181973450. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009. PMID: 19214100 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Miniature robotic guidance for spine surgery--introduction of a novel system and analysis of challenges encountered during the clinical development phase at two spine centres.Int J Med Robot. 2006 Jun;2(2):146-53. doi: 10.1002/rcs.90. Int J Med Robot. 2006. PMID: 17520625 Clinical Trial.
-
Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw insertion for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: a matched cohort comparison.J Neurosurg Spine. 2014 Jun;20(6):636-43. doi: 10.3171/2014.3.SPINE13714. Epub 2014 Apr 11. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014. PMID: 24725180
-
Bone-mounted miniature robotic guidance for pedicle screw and translaminar facet screw placement: Part I--Technical development and a test case result.Neurosurgery. 2006 Sep;59(3):641-50; discussion 641-50. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000229055.00829.5B. Neurosurgery. 2006. PMID: 16955046
-
Robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement accuracy compared with alternative guidance in lateral single-position surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2023 Jun 23;39(4):443-451. doi: 10.3171/2023.3.SPINE2329. Print 2023 Oct 1. J Neurosurg Spine. 2023. PMID: 37382304
-
[Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement].Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2023 Feb;35(1):37-42. doi: 10.1007/s00064-022-00792-5. Epub 2022 Dec 2. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2023. PMID: 36459194 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Assessing the Intraoperative Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement by Using a Bone-Mounted Miniature Robot System through Secondary Registration.PLoS One. 2016 Apr 7;11(4):e0153235. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153235. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27054360 Free PMC article.
-
Can Robotic Spine Surgery Become the Standard of Care?Int J Spine Surg. 2022 Oct;16(S2):S44-S49. doi: 10.14444/8276. Epub 2022 Jun 28. Int J Spine Surg. 2022. PMID: 35764357 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of robot-assisted spine surgery on health care quality and neurosurgical economics: A systemic review.Neurosurg Rev. 2020 Feb;43(1):17-25. doi: 10.1007/s10143-018-0971-z. Epub 2018 Apr 3. Neurosurg Rev. 2020. PMID: 29611081
-
Evaluation of K-wireless robotic and navigation assisted pedicle screw placement in adult degenerative spinal surgery: learning curve and technical notes.J Spine Surg. 2021 Jun;7(2):141-154. doi: 10.21037/jss-20-687. J Spine Surg. 2021. PMID: 34296026 Free PMC article.
-
Robot-assisted spinal augmentation procedures: is it worth the increased effort?Eur Spine J. 2023 Nov;32(11):3927-3932. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07735-z. Epub 2023 Jun 13. Eur Spine J. 2023. PMID: 37310471
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources