Robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement: lessons learned from the first 102 patients

被引:160
作者
Hu, Xiaobang [1 ]
Ohnmeiss, Donna D. [2 ]
Lieberman, Isador H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Texas Hlth Presbyterian Hosp Plano, Texas Back Inst, Scoliosis & Spine Tumor Ctr, Plano, TX 75093 USA
[2] Texas Back Inst Res Fdn, Plano, TX 75093 USA
关键词
Pedicle screws; Robotic-assisted; Minimally invasive; Spinal surgery; SCOLIOSIS SURGERY; ACCURACY; GUIDANCE; SPINE; COMPLICATIONS; FIXATION; SYSTEM; EXPERIENCE; LUMBAR;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-012-2499-1
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Surgeons' interest in image and/or robotic guidance for spinal implant placement is increasing. This technology is continually improving and may be particularly useful in patients with challenging anatomy. Only through careful clinical evaluation can its successful applications, limitations, and areas for improvement be defined. This study evaluates the outcomes of robotic-assisted screw placement in a consecutive series of 102 patients. Data were recorded from technical notes and operative records created immediately following each surgery case, in which the robotic system was used to guide pedicle screw placement. All cases were performed at the same hospital by a single surgeon. The majority of patients had spinal deformity and/or previous spine surgery. Each planned screw placement was classified as: (1) successful/accurately placed screw using robotic guidance; (2) screw malpositioned using robot; (3) use of robot aborted and screw placed manually; (4) planned screw not placed as screw deemed non essential for construct stability. Data from each case were reviewed by two independent researchers to indentify the diagnosis, number of attempted robotic guided screw placements and the outcome of the attempted placement as well as complications or reasons for non-placement. Robotic-guided screw placement was successfully used in 95 out of 102 patients. In those 95 patients, 949 screws (87.5 % of 1,085 planned screws) were successfully implanted. Eleven screws (1.0 %) placed using the robotic system were misplaced (all presumably due to "skiving" of the drill bit or trocar off the side of the facet). Robotic guidance was aborted and 110 screws (10.1 %) were manually placed, generally due to poor registration and/or technical trajectory issues. Fifteen screws (1.4 %) were not placed after intraoperative determination that the screw was not essential for construct stability. The robot was not used as planned in seven patients, one due to severe deformity, one due to very high body mass index, one due to extremely poor bone quality, one due to registration difficulty caused by previously placed loosened hardware, one due to difficulty with platform mounting and two due to device technical issues. Of the 960 screws that were implanted using the robot, 949 (98.9 %) were successfully and accurately implanted and 11 (1.1 %) were malpositioned, despite the fact that the majority of patients had significant spinal deformities and/or previous spine surgeries. "Tool skiving" was thought to be the inciting issue with the misplaced screws. Intraoperative anteroposterior and oblique fluoroscopic imaging for registration is critical and was the limiting issue in four of the seven aborted cases.
引用
收藏
页码:661 / 666
页数:6
相关论文
共 24 条
  • [1] Fluoroscopically assisted pedicle screw fixation for thoracic and thoracolumbar injuries - Technique and short-term complications
    Carbone, JJ
    Tortolani, J
    Quartararo, LG
    [J]. SPINE, 2003, 28 (01) : 91 - 97
  • [2] Clinical Acceptance and Accuracy Assessment of Spinal Implants Guided With SpineAssist Surgical Robot Retrospective Study
    Devito, Dennis P.
    Kaplan, Leon
    Dietl, Rupert
    Pfeiffer, Michael
    Horne, Dale
    Silberstein, Boris
    Hardenbrook, Mitchell
    Kiriyanthan, George
    Barzilay, Yair
    Bruskin, Alexander
    Sackerer, Dieter
    Alexandrovsky, Vitali
    Stueer, Carsten
    Burger, Ralf
    Maeurer, Johannes
    Gordon, Donald G.
    Schoenmayr, Robert
    Friedlander, Alon
    Knoller, Nachshon
    Schmieder, Kirsten
    Pechlivanis, Ioannis
    Kim, In-Se
    Meyer, Bernhard
    Shoham, Moshe
    [J]. SPINE, 2010, 35 (24) : 2109 - 2115
  • [3] The use of pedicle-screw internal fixation for the operative treatment of spinal disorders
    Gaines, RW
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2000, 82A (10) : 1458 - 1476
  • [4] Complications of Pedicle Screw Fixation in Scoliosis Surgery A Systematic Review
    Hicks, John M.
    Singla, Amit
    Shen, Francis H.
    Arlet, Vincent
    [J]. SPINE, 2010, 35 (11) : E465 - E470
  • [5] Complications of pedicle screws in lumbar and lumbosacral fusions in 105 consecutive primary operations
    Jutte, PC
    Castelein, RM
    [J]. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2002, 11 (06) : 594 - 598
  • [6] Perioperative course and accuracy of screw positioning in conventional, open robotic-guided and percutaneous robotic-guided, pedicle screw placement
    Kantelhardt, Sven Rainer
    Martinez, Ramon
    Baerwinkel, Stefan
    Burger, Ralf
    Giese, Alf
    Rohde, Veit
    [J]. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2011, 20 (06) : 860 - 868
  • [7] Free hand pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine: Is it safe?
    Kim, YJ
    Lenke, LG
    Bridwell, KH
    Cho, YSS
    Riew, KD
    [J]. SPINE, 2004, 29 (03) : 333 - 342
  • [8] Pedicle screw placement accuracy - A meta-analysis
    Kosmopoulos, Victor
    Schizas, Constantin
    [J]. SPINE, 2007, 32 (03) : E111 - E120
  • [9] Improved accuracy of computer-assisted cervical pedicle screw insertion
    Kotani, Y
    Abumi, K
    Ito, M
    Minami, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2003, 99 (03) : 257 - 263
  • [10] Accuracy analysis of pedicle screw placement in posterior scoliosis surgery - Comparison between conventional fluoroscopic and computer-assisted technique
    Kotani, Yoshihisa
    Abumi, Kuniyoshi
    Ito, Manabu
    Takahata, Masahiko
    Sudo, Hideki
    Ohshima, Shigeki
    Minami, Akio
    [J]. SPINE, 2007, 32 (14) : 1543 - 1550