Robotic-guided placement of cervical pedicle screws: feasibility and accuracy.

INTRODUCTION: It has been shown that pedicle screw instrumentation in the cervical spine has superior biomechanical pullout strength and stability. However, due to the complex and variable anatomy of the cervical pedicles and the risk of catastrophic complications, cervical pedicle screw placement is not widely utilized. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective, consecutive patient review. OBJECTIVE: To review and report our experience with robotic guided cervical pedicle screw placement. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed preoperative and postoperative CT scans of 12 consecutive patients who underwent cervical pedicle screw fixation with robotic guidance. Screw placement and deviation from the preoperative plan were assessed using the robotic system's planning software by fusing the preoperative CT (with the planned cervical pedicle screws) to the post-op CT. This process was carried out by manually aligning the anatomical landmarks on the two CTs. Once a satisfactory fusion was achieved, the software's measurement tool was used manually to compare the planned vs. actual screw placements in the axial, sagittal and coronal planes within the instrumented pedicle in a resolution of 0.1 mm. Medical charts were reviewed for technical issues and intra-operative complications. RESULTS: Eighty-eight cervical pedicle screws were reviewed in 12 patients; mean age = 65 years, M:F = 2:1, and mean BMI = 27.99. No intra-operative complications related to the cervical pedicle screw placement were reported. Robotic guidance was successful in all 88 screws: eight in C2, 14 in C3, 16 in each of C4 and C5, 19 in C6, and 15 at C7. There were 14 pedicle screw breaches (15.9%); all were medial, less than 1 mm, and with no clinical consequences. In the axial plane, the screws deviated from the preoperative plan by 1.32 ± 1.17 mm and in the sagittal plane by 1.27 ± 1.00 mm. In the trajectory view, the overall deviation was 2.20 ± 1.17 mm. Although differences were observed in screw deviation from the pre-op plan between the right and left sides, they were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that robotic-guided cervical pedicle screw placement is feasible and safe. The medial breaches did not result in any clinical consequences.

The predictive accuracy of surgical planning using pre-op planning software and a robotic guidance system.

BACKGROUND: Navigation and robotic-guided systems are being used more often to facilitate efficient and accurate placement of hardware during spinal surgeries. Preoperative surgical planning is a key step in the safe use of these tools. No studies have yet investigated the predictive accuracy of surgical planning using a robotic guidance system. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected from patients in whom Mazor X-Align ™ [Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN., USA] robotic guidance system software was used to plan their spinal instrumentation in order to achieve the best possible correction and the plans executed intraoperatively under robotic guidance. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients (26 females, 7 males) were included. Their mean age was 51 years (12-79), and their mean BMI was 23.90 (15.55-35.91). Their primary diagnoses were scoliosis (20), kyphosis (5), spondylolisthesis (4), adjacent segment degeneration (3), and metastatic tumor (1). Preoperatively, the patients' mean coronal Cobb Angle (CA) was 36.5 ± 14.4°, and their mean sagittal CA was 27.7 ± 20.0°. The mean planned correction coronal CA was 0.2 ± 1.2°, and the mean planned correction sagittal CA was 28.4 ± 16.7°. Postoperatively, the patients' mean coronal CA that was achieved was 5.8 ± 7.4°, and their mean sagittal CA was 31.0 ± 18.3°. The mean difference between the planned and achieved angles was 5.5 ± 7.4° for the coronal, and 9.03 ± 9.01° for the sagittal CA. For the thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis, the mean difference between the planned and postoperatively measured values was 15.3 ± 10.8 and 12.8 ± 9.6, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the predictive accuracy of the use of preoperative planning software and robotic guidance to facilitate the surgical plan is within 6° and 9° in the coronal and sagittal planes, respectively.

Revision adult spinal deformity surgery: Does the number of previous operations have a negative impact on outcome?

PURPOSE: To study the effect of the number of previous operations on the outcome of revision adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-seven consecutive patients who underwent revision ASD surgery were classified as follows: those who had one previous operation (group 1), had two previous operations (group 2) and had three or more previous operations (group 3). Perioperative complications and additional surgeries were reviewed. Back pain, leg pain, ODI scores and radiographic measurements were obtained. RESULTS: Preoperatively, the patients in group 3 had worse ODI (60.0 vs. 48.1 and 47.9, p < 0.01) but not back pain or leg pain. Group 2 and group 3 had worse coronal plumb line (38.4 and 35.8 mm vs. 18.2 mm, p < 0.05) and SVA (99.7 and 153.9 mm vs. 67.8 mm, p < 0.05). Group 3 had worse PI-LL mismatch (40.1° vs. 25.3° and 26.2°, p = 0.08). Minor and major perioperative complication rates were 27.5% in group 1, 31.1% in group 2 and 39.0% in group 3 (p > 0.05). At mean 30-month follow-up, the additional surgery rates were 7.8, 17.8 and 22.0%, respectively (p = 0.07). The patients in all groups had improved back pain, leg pain and ODI scores. The net improvements on back pain, leg pain and ODI were not statistically different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Revision ASD patients who had two or more previous operations present with more coronal and sagittal imbalance and worse functional status. Patients who had three or more previous operations have relatively higher reoperation rate but similar perioperative complication rate and similar clinic improvements. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Giant cell tumor of the thoracic spine in a 30-year-old woman.

Giant cell tumor (GCT) of the spine is a rare, benign tumor. Patients typically present with pain and also may experience neurologic deficits from spinal cord and/or nerve root compression. This article describes a patient who presented with acute mid-back pain, was diagnosed with spinal GCT through biopsy, and was treated successfully with surgical resection and instrumentation.

Correction to: A method to quantify the "cone of economy".

Unfortunately, in the abstract at the results section units have been published incorrectly.

A method to quantify the "cone of economy".

STUDY DESIGN: A non-randomized, prospective, concurrent control cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to develop and evaluate a method to quantify the dimensions of the cone of economy (COE) and the energy expenditure associated with maintaining a balanced posture within the COE, scoliosis patients and compare them to matched non-scoliotic controls in a group of adult degenerative. Balance is defined as the ability of the human body to maintain its center of mass (COM) within the base of support with minimal postural sway. The cone of economy refers to the stable region of upright standing posture. The underlying assumption is that deviating outside one's individual cone challenges the balance mechanisms. Adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) patients exhibit a variety of postural changes within their COE, involving the spine, pelvis and lower extremities, in their effort to compensate for the altered posture. METHODS: Ten ADS patients and ten non-scoliotic volunteers performed a series of functional balance tests. The dimensions of the COE and the energy expenditure related to maintaining balance within the COE were measured using a human motion video capture system and dynamic surface electromyography. RESULTS: ADS patients presented more COM sway in the sagittal (ADS: 1.59 cm vs. H: 0.61 cm; p = 0.049) and coronal (ADS: 2.84 cm vs. H: 1.72 cm; p = 0.046) directions in comparison to the non-scoliotic control. ADS patients presented with more COM (ADS: 33.30 cm vs. H: 19.13 cm; p = 0.039) and head (ADS: 31.06 cm vs. H: 19.13 cm; p = 0.013) displacements in comparison to the non-scoliotic controls. Scoliosis patients expended more muscle activity to maintain static standing, as manifest by increased muscle activity in their erector spinae (ADS: 37.16 mV vs. H: 20.31 mV; p = 0.050), and gluteus maximus (ADS: 33.12 mV vs. H: 12.09 mV; p = 0.001) muscles. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to develop and evaluate a method that quantifies the COE boundaries, COM displacement, and amount of sway within the COE along with the energy expenditure for a specific patient. This method of COE measurement will enable spine care practitioners to objectively evaluate their patients in an effort to determine the most appropriate treatment options, and in objectively documenting the effectiveness of their intervention.

Revision spine surgery in patients without clinical signs of infection: How often are there occult infections in removed hardware?

PURPOSE: To examine the incidence of occult infection in revision spine surgeries and its correlation with preoperative inflammatory markers. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent revision spine surgery and hardware removal between 2010 and 2016. Patients who had preoperative clinical signs of infection were excluded. The hardware and surrounding tissue culture results were obtained. The patients' diagnosis and preoperative inflammatory marker (ESR, CRP, and procalcitonin) levels were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 162 consecutive patients were included in this study. The patients' mean age was 61 years (range 14-88). One hundred and three patients (63.6%) were female. Seventy-two patients (44.4%) had loose hardware and 88 patients (54.3%) had pseudarthrosis. Postoperatively, the hardware and/or surrounding tissue culture was positive in 15 patients (9.3%). The most commonly identified organisms were Propionibacterium acnes (7/15, 46.7%) and Staphylococcus (6/15, 40.0%). The other identified organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (1/15, 6.7%) and Serratia marcescens (1/15, 6.7%). Only four patients with positive cultures had elevated preoperative ESR and CRP levels. Only two patients with positive cultures had elevated preoperative procalcitonin levels. There is no correlation between the patients' preoperative ESR, CRP, procalcitonin levels, and positive culture results (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that occult infections are present in 9.3% of patients who underwent revision spine surgery and hardware removal although they did not have clinical signs of infection. Those commonly used preoperative inflammatory markers such as ESR, CRP, and procalcitonin may not be sensitive enough to detect occult infections in these patients. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The use of gait analysis in the assessment of patients afflicted with spinal disorders.

PURPOSE: Use gait analysis to establish and detail the clinically relevant components of normal human gait, analyze the gait characteristics for those afflicted with spinal pathology, and identify those aspects of human gait that correlate with pre- and postoperative patient function and outcomes. METHODS: Twenty patients with adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS), 20 patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM), and 15 healthy volunteers performed over-ground gait trials with a comfortable self-selected speed using video cameras to measure patient motion, surface electromyography (EMG) to record muscle activity, and force plates to record ground reaction force (GRF). Gait distance and temporal parameters, ankle, knee, hip, pelvic, and trunk range of motion (ROM), duration of lower extremity EMG activity and peak vertical GRF were measured. RESULTS: Patients with ADS and CSM exhibited a significantly slower gait speed, decrease in step length, cadence, longer stride time, stance time, double support time, and an increase in step width compared to those in the control group. These patients also exhibited a significantly different ankle, knee, pelvic, and trunk ROM. Moreover, spinal disorder patients exhibited a significantly longer duration of rectus femoris, semitendinosus, tibialis anterior and medial gastrocnemius muscle activity along with an altered vertical GRF pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Gait analysis provides an objective measure of functional gait in healthy controls as well as those with ADS and CSM. This study established and detailed some of the important kinematic and kinetic variables of gait in patients with spinal disorders. We recommend that spine care providers use gait analysis as part of their clinical evaluation to provide an objective measure of function. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Robotic-guided sacro-pelvic fixation using S2 alar-iliac screws: feasibility and accuracy.

PURPOSE: To review our experience with robotic guided S2-alar iliac (S2AI) screw placement. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent S2AI fixation with robotic guidance. Screw placement and deviation from the preoperative plan were assessed by fusing preoperative CT (with the planned S2AI screws) to postoperative CT. The software's measurement tool was used to compare the planned vs. actual screw placements in axial and lateral views, at entry point to the S2 pedicle and at a 30 mm depth at the screws' mid-shaft, in a resolution of 0.1 mm. Medical charts were reviewed for technical issues and intra-operative complications. RESULTS: 35 S2AI screws were reviewed in 18 patients. The patients' mean age was 60 years. No intra-operative complications that related to the placement of S2AI screws were reported and robotic guidance was successful in all 35 screws. Post-operative CT scans showed that all trajectories were accurate. No violations of the iliac cortex or breaches of the anterior sacrum were noted. At the entry point, the screw deviated from the pre-operative plan by 3.0 ± 2.2 mm in the axial plane and 1.8 ± 1.6 mm in the lateral plane. At 30 mm depth, the screw deviated from the pre-operative plan by 2.1 ± 1.3 mm in the axial plane and 1.2 ± 1.1 mm in the lateral plane. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic guided S2AI screw placement is feasible and accurate. No screw malpositions or complications that related to the placement of S2AI screws occurred in this series. Larger studies are needed to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of robotic guided sacral-pelvic fixation.

Proximal instrumented vertebral body chance fracture after pedicle screw instrumentation in a thoracic kyphosis patient with osteoporosis.

STUDY DESIGN: We present a case of proximal vertebral body chance fracture after pedicle screw instrumentation and fusion in a 67-year-old woman with osteoporosis and thoracic kyphosis. OBJECTIVE: To report the rare and unique complication of proximal vertebral body chance fracture after pedicle screw instrumentation and fusion in a kyphosis patient. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Pedicle screw instrumentation has been associated with complications not limited to neurological or vascular injury, loss of curve correction, intraoperative pedicle fracture or loosening, dural laceration, deep infection, and pseudarthrosis. To the best of our knowledge, there are no previous reports describing a chance-type fracture generated by a pedicle screw fixation at the proximal end of a construct. METHODS: A 67-year-old woman suffered from progressive thoracic kyphosis and mid thoracic pain presented 2 weeks after pedicle screw instrumentation and correction. She developed a vertebral body fracture at the proximal end of the instrumentation construct. Surgical intervention, including removal of the screws in the fractured vertebrae and extension of the instrumented fusion across the cervicothoracic junction, effectively restored the physiological sagittal alignment. RESULTS: Postoperatively, at 12-month follow-up, the patient is doing exceptionally well with near-complete relief of back pain and an excellent maintenance of correction. CONCLUSIONS: Chance fracture in osteoporotic bone at the proximal end of a construct due to a pedicle screw is a rare complication but it may result in catastrophic consequences. Early recognition of this complication, reduction of the fraction-dislocation, and an extension of the instrumentation can be utilized for realignment and long-term stabilization.

A proposed set of metrics for standardized outcome reporting in the management of low back pain.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Outcome measurement has been shown to improve performance in several fields of healthcare. This understanding has driven a growing interest in value-based healthcare, where value is defined as outcomes achieved per money spent. While low back pain (LBP) constitutes an enormous burden of disease, no universal set of metrics has yet been accepted to measure and compare outcomes. Here, we aim to define such a set. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An international group of 22 specialists in several disciplines of spine care was assembled to review literature and select LBP outcome metrics through a 6-round modified Delphi process. The scope of the outcome set was degenerative lumbar conditions. RESULTS: Patient-reported metrics include numerical pain scales, lumbar-related function using the Oswestry disability index, health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire, and questions assessing work status and analgesic use. Specific common and serious complications are included. Recommended follow-up intervals include 6, 12, and 24 months after initiating treatment, with optional follow-up at 3 months and 5 years. Metrics for risk stratification are selected based on pre-existing tools. INTERPRETATION: The outcome measures recommended here are structured around specific etiologies of LBP, span a patient's entire cycle of care, and allow for risk adjustment. Thus, when implemented, this set can be expected to facilitate meaningful comparisons and ultimately provide a continuous feedback loop, enabling ongoing improvements in quality of care. Much work lies ahead in implementation, revision, and validation of this set, but it is an essential first step toward establishing a community of LBP providers focused on maximizing the value of the care we deliver.

What is the learning curve for robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery?

BACKGROUND: Some early studies with robotic-assisted pedicle screw implantation have suggested these systems increase accuracy of screw placement. However, the relationship between the success rate of screw placement and the learning curve of this new technique has not been evaluated. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined whether, as a function of surgeon experience, (1) the success rate of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement improved, (2) the frequency of conversion from robotic to manual screw placement decreased, and (3) the frequency of malpositioned screws decreased. METHODS: Between June 2010 and August 2012, the senior surgeon (IHL) performed 174 posterior spinal procedures using pedicle screws, 162 of which were attempted with robotic assistance. The use of the robotic system was aborted in 12 of the 162 procedures due to technical issues (registration failure, software crash, etc). The robotic system was successfully used in the remaining 150 procedures. These were the first procedures performed with the robot by the senior surgeon, and in this study, we divided the early learning curve into five groups: Group 1 (Patients 1-30), Group 2 (Patients 31-60), Group 3 (Patients 61-90), Group 4 (Patients 91-120), and Group 5 (Patients 121-150). One hundred twelve patients (75%) had spinal deformity and 80 patients (53%) had previous spine surgery. The accuracy of screw placement in the groups was assessed based on intraoperative biplanar fluoroscopy and postoperative radiographs. The results from these five groups were compared to determine the effect on the learning curve. The numbers of attempted pedicle screw placements were 359, 312, 349, 359, and 320 in Groups 1 to 5, respectively. RESULTS: The rates of successfully placed screws using robotic guidance were 82%, 93%, 91%, 95%, and 93% in Groups 1 to 5. The rates of screws converted to manual placement were 17%, 7%, 8%, 4%, and 7%. Of the robotically placed screws, the screw malposition rates were 0.8%, 0.3%, 1.4%, 0.8%, and 0%. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of successfully placed pedicle screws improved with increasing experience. The rate of the screws that were converted to manual placement decreased with increasing experience. The frequency of screw malposition was similar over the learning curve at 0% to 1.4%. Future studies will need to determine whether this finding is generalizable to others. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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

INTRODUCTION: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Use of an ultrasonic osteotome device in spine surgery: experience from the first 128 patients.

INTRODUCTION: The ultrasonic BoneScalpel is a tissue-specific device that allows the surgeon to make precise osteotomies while protecting collateral or adjacent soft tissue structures. The device is comprised of a blunt ultrasonic blade that oscillates at over 22,500 cycles/s with an imperceptible microscopic amplitude. The recurring impacts pulverize the noncompliant crystalline structure resulting in a precise cut. The more compliant adjacent soft tissue is not affected by the ultrasonic oscillation. The purpose of this study is to report the experience and safety of using this ultrasonic osteotome device in a variety of spine surgeries. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from medical charts and surgical reports for each surgery in which the ultrasonic scalpel was used to perform any type of osteotomy (facetectomy, laminotomy, laminectomy, en bloc resection, Smith Petersen osteotomy, pedicle subtraction osteotomy, etc.). The majority of patients had spinal stenosis, degenerative or adolescent scoliosis, pseudoarthrosis, adjacent segment degeneration, and spondylolisthesis et al. Intra-operative complications were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 128 consecutive patients (73 female, 55 male) beginning with our first case experience were included in this study. The mean age of the patients was 58 years (range 12-85 years). Eighty patients (62.5 %) had previous spine surgery and/or spinal deformity. The ultrasonic scalpel was used at all levels of the spine and the average levels operated on each patient were 5. The mean operation time (skin to skin) was 4.3 h and the mean blood loss was 425.4 ml. In all cases, the ultrasonic scalpel was used to create the needed osteotomies to facilitate the surgical procedure without any percussion on the spinal column or injury to the underlying nerves. There was a noticeable absence of bleeding from the cut end of the bone consistent with the ultrasonic application. There were 11 instances of dural injuries (8.6 %) and two of which were directly associated with the use of ultrasonic device. In no procedure was the use of the ultrasonic scalpel abandoned for use of another instrument due to difficulty in using the device or failure to achieve the desired osteotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the ultrasonic scalpel was safe and performed as desired when used as a bone cutting device to facilitate osteotomies in a variety of spine surgeries. However, caution should be taken to avoid potential thermal injury and dural tear. If used properly, this device may decrease the risk of soft tissue injury associated with the use of high speed burrs and oscillating saws during spine surgery.

Catastrophic acute failure of pelvic fixation in adult spinal deformity requiring revision surgery: a multicenter review of incidence, failure mechanisms, and risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: There are few prior reports of acute pelvic instrumentation failure in spinal deformity surgery. The objective of this study was to determine if a previously identified mechanism and rate of pelvic fixation failure were present across multiple institutions, and to determine risk factors for these types of failures. METHODS: Thirteen academic medical centers performed a retrospective review of 18 months of consecutive adult spinal fusions extending 3 or more levels, which included new pelvic screws at the time of surgery. Acute pelvic fixation failure was defined as occurring within 6 months of the index surgery and requiring surgical revision. RESULTS: Failure occurred in 37 (5%) of 779 cases and consisted of either slippage of the rods or displacement of the set screws from the screw tulip head (17 cases), screw shaft fracture (9 cases), screw loosening (9 cases), and/or resultant kyphotic fracture of the sacrum (6 cases). Revision strategies involved new pelvic fixation and/or multiple rod constructs. Six patients (16%) who underwent revision with fewer than 4 rods to the pelvis sustained a second acute failure, but no secondary failures occurred when at least 4 rods were used. In the univariate analysis, the magnitude of surgical correction was higher in the failure cohort (higher preoperative T1-pelvic angle [T1PA], presence of a 3-column osteotomy; p < 0.05). Uncorrected postoperative deformity increased failure risk (pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch > 10°, higher postoperative T1PA; p < 0.05). Use of pelvic screws less than 8.5 mm in diameter also increased the likelihood of failure (p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, a larger preoperative global deformity as measured by T1PA was associated with failure, male patients were more likely to experience failure than female patients, and there was a strong association with implant manufacturer (p < 0.05). Anterior column support with an L5-S1 interbody fusion was protective against failure (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Acute catastrophic failures involved large-magnitude surgical corrections and likely resulted from high mechanical strain on the pelvic instrumentation. Patients with large corrections may benefit from anterior structural support placed at the most caudal motion segment and multiple rods connecting to more than 2 pelvic fixation points. If failure occurs, salvage with a minimum of 4 rods and 4 pelvic fixation points can be successful.

The Fernstrom ball revisited.

INTRODUCTION: In 1959, Harmon was the first to implant a vitallium sphere into the intervertebral disc space in order to preserve mobility and maintain disc height in patients with back pain secondary to degenerative disc disease. Fernstrom reported good results after implantation of stainless steel spheres. However, a reduction in disc height frequently occurred secondary to sphere subsidence into the endplates. This often led to revision surgery, and the concept was abandoned. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report on four patients who underwent cobalt-chrome sphere implantation, and later presented to us with symptoms that were a direct result of sphere subsidence. All four patients presented with low back pain and/or lower extremity pain, and some with weakness. Imaging demonstrated that all patients had a loss of disc space height with sphere subsidence. Three patients underwent sphere removal, anterior interbody fusion using femoral ring allograft and posterior pedicle or facet screw fixation. In the fourth patient, the sphere was subsided into both the L5 and S1 endplates prohibiting removal. The patient underwent a posterior L5-S1 posterolateral fusion and facet screw fixation. The length of time from sphere implantation to the revision surgery ranges from 8 to 41 months. RESULTS: Ten months to 3 years after the revision surgery, all four patients reported an improvement in outcome. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report describing the complications resulting from cobalt chrome sphere implantation and revision strategies for managing the recently resurrected cobalt chrome sphere.

Assessment of pedicle screw placement accuracy, procedure time, and radiation exposure using a miniature robotic guidance system.

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled, cadaveric implantation trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a robotic guidance system on screw placement accuracy, amount of radiation exposure, and length of procedure time during percutaneous pedicle screw implantation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Pedicle screws are associated with low complication rates, and several computer-assisted image guidance systems exist that facilitate accurate screw placement. However, these systems may represent substantial radiation exposure risk to patients and surgeons. METHODS: We implanted 234 pedicle screws in 12 cadavers (study group: 15 surgeons, 197 screws, and 10 specimens; control group: 2 surgeons, 37 screws, and 2 specimens). We measured procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and radiation exposure and evaluated screw placement accuracy with computed tomography scans. To evaluate the learning curve, we compared measurements with those of an experienced robotic guidance user through the 2-sample (heteroscedastic), 1-tail t test (P< 0.05). RESULTS: Relative to control, the study group had fewer screw placement deviations (average, 2.6±0.7 mm vs. 1.1±0.4 mm; P<0.0001), fewer pedicle wall breaches of 4 mm or greater (average, 5.4% vs. 1.5%), lower surgeon radiation exposure (average, 136 mrem vs. 4.2 mrem), lower fluoroscopy time per screw (average, 33.0 s vs. 0.9 s), and shorter procedure time (average, 1.98 h vs. 1.23 h). Use of robotic guidance increased the accuracy of percutaneous pedicle screw placement by 58%, thereby reducing the risk of neurologic injury (as measured by breaches >4 mm), new-user radiation exposure (by 98.2%), and procedure time (by 36%). CONCLUSIONS: The advantages associated with a robotic guidance system may make the surgeon more at ease about offering minimally invasive or percutaneous surgical options to patients and more comfortable about implementing pedicle-based fixation in general. This advanced technology may also allow inclusion of patients with complicated anatomic deformities, who are often excluded from pedicle screw-based surgery options.

Robotic-Assisted Revision Spine Surgery.

As the surgical treatment of spinal degenerative conditions increases, more patients will ultimately require revision spine surgery. Revision spine surgery is more technically demanding than primary surgery with increased complication rates and variable clinical outcomes. The freehand placement of pedicle screws into a previously operated and/or fused level is more difficult due to the altered anatomic landmarks and/or bone loss. Additional benefit of robotic spine surgery is appreciated during such revision spine surgical procedures with unusual anatomic considerations, whereby the preoperative planning using robotic planning software and computer-assisted robotic guidance play a crucial role in assisting the surgeon to "visualize the invisible." We highlight 3 roles of this technology in 3 cases: planning strategic osteotomies, redrilling of screw holes, and insertion of revision screws in previously operated thoracolumbar and cervical spine regions.

Can Robotic Spine Surgery Become the Standard of Care?

Concerns regarding traditional techniques led to the development of robotic systems to facilitate the safe and accurate placement of pedicle screws. The Mazor Spine Assist was the first robotic spine surgery (RSS) platform to receive US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2004. Since then, there has been a steady increase in the application of RSS with several additional iterations of the Mazor platform and other competing systems receiving approval. As the indications, potential benefits, and utilization of RSS continue to expand, the question naturally arises as to whether RSS will eventually become the standard of care for spine surgery. In this article, we review the available evidence and experience with RSS and discuss the potential for RSS to become the medical standard of care.

Minimally Invasive Robotic Lumbar Facet Decortication.

Minimally invasive percutaneous pedicle screws (PPS) are placed through muscle sparing paramedian incisions and provide rigid 3 column fixation to promote stability and fusion. Percutaneous pedicle instrumentation is generally performed as adjunctive posterior stabilization after anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures. In these instances, arthrodesis is often achieved through the interbody fusion rather than posterior column fusion. In some cases, the surgeon may choose to perform posterior facet fusion in addition to PPS and anterior interbody. The addition of a minimally invasive facet fusion to PPS and anterior column interbody fusion creates more fusion surface and enables a truly circumferential fusion. While robotic-guided facet decortication has been suggested, there are currently no published techniques. Here, we describe a novel minimally invasive technique to perform percutaneous robotic facet decortication in conjunction with PPS following anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion.