Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted placement of pedicle screws compared to conventional free-hand technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- PMID: 32976997
- DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.09.007
Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted placement of pedicle screws compared to conventional free-hand technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Background context: The introduction and integration of robot technology into modern spine surgery provides surgeons with millimeter accuracy for pedicle screw placement. Coupled with computer-based navigation platforms, robot-assisted spine surgery utilizes augmented reality to potentially improve the safety profile of instrumentation.
Purpose: In this study, the authors seek to determine the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement compared to conventional free-hand (FH) technique.
Study design/setting: We conducted a systematic review of the electronic databases using different MeSH terms from 1980 to 2020.
Outcome measures: The present study measures pedicle screw accuracy, complication rates, proximal-facet joint violation, intraoperative radiation time, radiation dosage, and length of surgery.
Results: A total of 1,525 patients (7,379 pedicle screws) from 19 studies with 777 patients (51.0% with 3,684 pedicle screws) in the robotic-assisted group were included. Perfect pedicle screw accuracy, as categorized by Gerztbein-Robbin Grade A, was significantly superior with robotic-assisted surgery compared to FH-technique (Odds ratio [OR]: 1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-2.35; p=.003). Similarly, clinically acceptable pedicle screw accuracy (Grade A+B) was significantly higher with robotic-assisted surgery versus FH-technique (OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.01-2.37; p=.05). Furthermore, the complication rates and proximal-facet joint violation were 69% (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.20-0.48; p<.00001) and 92% less likely (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.03-0.20; p<.00001) with robotic-assisted surgery versus FH-group. Robotic-assisted pedicle screw implantation significantly reduced intraoperative radiation time (MD: -5.30, 95% CI: -6.83-3.76; p<.00001) and radiation dosage (MD: -3.70, 95% CI: -4.80-2.60; p<.00001) compared to the conventional FH-group. However, the length of surgery was significantly higher with robotic-assisted surgery (MD: 22.70, 95% CI: 6.57-38.83; p=.006) compared to the FH-group.
Conclusion: This meta-analysis corroborates the accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement.
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Augmented realit; Efficacy; Pedicle screw; Robotics; Safety; Spine fusion.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Robot-assisted and conventional freehand pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Eur Spine J. 2018 Apr;27(4):921-930. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5333-y. Epub 2017 Oct 14. Eur Spine J. 2018. PMID: 29032475
-
Robotic and navigated pedicle screws are safer and more accurate than fluoroscopic freehand screws: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Spine J. 2023 Feb;23(2):197-208. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.10.006. Epub 2022 Oct 21. Spine J. 2023. PMID: 36273761
-
Comparison of Cranial Facet Joint Violation Rate and Four Other Clinical Indexes Between Robot-assisted and Freehand Pedicle Screw Placement in Spine Surgery: A Meta-analysis.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Nov 15;45(22):E1532-E1540. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003632. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020. PMID: 32756278
-
Safety and risk factors of TINAVI robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery.J Orthop Surg Res. 2022 Aug 8;17(1):379. doi: 10.1186/s13018-022-03271-6. J Orthop Surg Res. 2022. PMID: 35941684 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Superior-Level Facet Joint Violations Between Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement and Conventional Open Fluoroscopic-Guided Pedicle Screw Placement.Orthop Surg. 2019 Oct;11(5):850-856. doi: 10.1111/os.12534. Orthop Surg. 2019. PMID: 31663290 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
[Brief history and application prospect of robotic spine surgery].Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2024 Aug 15;38(8):899-903. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202406089. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2024. PMID: 39175308 Free PMC article. Chinese.
-
Accuracy and clinical characteristics of robot-assisted cervical spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Int Orthop. 2024 Jul;48(7):1903-1914. doi: 10.1007/s00264-024-06179-4. Epub 2024 Apr 13. Int Orthop. 2024. PMID: 38613575
-
Health Care Social Robots in the Age of Generative AI: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR Res Protoc. 2025 Apr 14;14:e63017. doi: 10.2196/63017. JMIR Res Protoc. 2025. PMID: 40227846 Free PMC article.
-
Biomechanical effects of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with vertical placement of pedicle screws compared to traditional placement.World J Clin Cases. 2024 Jul 16;12(20):4108-4120. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i20.4108. World J Clin Cases. 2024. PMID: 39015896 Free PMC article.
-
Feasibility of outpatient robot assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.N Am Spine Soc J. 2022 Dec 17;13:100192. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100192. eCollection 2023 Mar. N Am Spine Soc J. 2022. PMID: 36620079 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous