Safety of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery: Experience from the initial 125 cases.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to evaluate the safety of robot-assisted screw placement in 125 cases after introducing a spinal robotics system and to identify the situations where deviation was likely to occur. METHODS: The subjects were 125 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted screw placement using a spinal robotics system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic) from April 2021 to January 2023. The 1048 screws placed with robotic assistance were evaluated. We investigated intraoperative adverse events of the robotics system and complications occurring within 30 days after surgery. We evaluated screw accuracy and deviation and compared them for vertebral levels, screw insertion methods (open traditional pedicle screw [Open-PS], cortical bone trajectory screw [CBT], percutaneous pedicle screw [PPS], and S2 alar iliac screw [S2AIS]), diagnosis, and phases of surgical cases. RESULTS: The deviation rate of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery was 2.2%. Complications were reoperation due to implant-related neurological deficit in 0.8% and surgical site infection in 0.8%. There was significant difference in the deviation rate between vertebral levels. The deviation rate of the T1-T4 level was high at 10.0%. There was significant difference in the deviation rate between Open-PS, CBT, PPS, and S2AIS. The PPSs had a high deviation rate of 10.3%. The deviation rates were not significantly different between patients with and without deformity. The deviation rate did not change depending on the experience of surgical cases, and the deviation rate was favorable from the onset. CONCLUSION: Although the robotic-assisted screw placement was safe, we should be extra vigilant when placing screws in the upper thoracic region (deviation rate 10.0%) and when using PPSs (deviation rate 10.3%).

Accuracy of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement comparing junior surgeons with expert surgeons: Can junior surgeons place pedicle screws as accurately as expert surgeons?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to verify whether a spine robotic system was useful for junior surgeons. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients underwent posterior spinal fusion with open surgery using a spine robotic system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland) from April to August 2021. Pedicle screw insertions were performed by five surgeons. The surgeon and insertion time were recorded for each pedicle screw. Two surgeons who are board-certified spine surgeons by the Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research (JSSR) were defined as the expert surgeon group. Three surgeons who were training to acquire qualifications as JSSR board certified spine surgeons were defined as the junior surgeon group. In postoperative CT images, the deviation of 255 pedicle screws was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins (GR) grades. RESULTS: In the expert surgeon group, the GR grades were Grade A for 79 screws (90.8%), Grade B for 6 (6.9%), Grade C for 2 (2.3%), and 0 (0%) for Grades D and E. I In the junior surgeon group, the GR grades were Grade A for 162 screws (96.4%), Grade B for 6 (3.6%), and 0 (0%) for Grades C, D, and E. There was no significant difference in the deviation rate between surgeon groups (p = 0.08). The mean insertion times were 174.5 ± 83.0 s in the expert surgeon group and 191.0 ± 111.0 s in the junior surgeon group. There was no significant difference in the insertion time between surgeon groups (p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in the deviation rate and the insertion time of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement between expert surgeons and junior surgeons who were training to acquire qualifications as JSSR board certified spine surgeons. Robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement can be effectively employed by junior surgeons.

Robotics is useful for less-experienced surgeons in spinal deformity surgery.

PURPOSE: To verify whether robotics was useful for surgeons who had less experience with spinal deformity surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 70 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted pedicle screw placements with open procedures using a spine robotic system (Mazor X Stealth Edition) at a single institution from April 2021 to April 2022. Gertzbein-Robbins grades were used to assess the deviation of the 599 pedicle screws in the postoperative CT images. The rate of Grade A was considered the perfect accuracy rate, and the rate of Grades C, D, and E was calculated as the deviation rate. The perfect accuracy rate and deviation rate were compared between the spinal deformity and the non-deformity groups. The perfect accuracy rate, deviation rate, and screw insertion time were compared in the spinal deformity cases between the expert surgeon group and the less-experienced surgeon group. RESULTS: The deviation rate of the spinal deformity group was higher than that of the non-deformity group even though there was no statistically significant difference (spinal deformity group: 2.3%, non-deformity group: 1.2%, p = 0.350). In the spinal deformity cases, there was no significant difference in the perfect accuracy rate between the expert surgeon group and the less-experienced surgeon group, but the deviation rate was significantly lower in the less-experienced surgeon group (expert surgeon group: 5.0%, less-experienced surgeon group: 0%, p = 0.008). The screw insertion time was significantly shorter in the less-experienced surgeon group. CONCLUSION: Robotics is particularly useful for surgeons with less experience in spinal deformity surgery.

Utility of a Navigated High-Speed Drill in Robotic-Assisted Screw Placement for Spine Surgery.

Purpose To elucidate the utility of a navigated high-speed drill used after the version upgrade in surgeries assisted by a spinal robotics system. Methods The subjects were 166 patients who underwent screw placement using a spinal robotics system between April 2021 to July 2023. A significant change during the study was the introduction of a navigated high-speed drill in 80 post-upgrade cases, aimed at improving drilling accuracy. Screw accuracy was analyzed using the Gertzbein and Robbins classification on postoperative CT scans. Screws placed before (pre-upgrade group: 718 screws in 86 cases) and after the system upgrade (post-upgrade group: 747 screws in 80 cases) were compared in terms of perfect accuracy and deviation rates. Results There were no significant differences in demographics or surgical details between the two groups. No significant differences were observed in the overall perfect accuracy rate and deviation rate (2.4% pre-upgrade vs. 2.0% post-upgrade) between the two groups. For the percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS), the perfect accuracy rate was significantly higher, and the deviation rate was significantly lower in the post-upgrade group (26.1% pre-upgrade vs. 4.4% post-upgrade). Notably, the post-upgrade group achieved 100% perfect accuracy and 0% deviation for the cortical bone trajectory screw (CBT) technique. Conclusions The introduction of the navigated high-speed drill did not significantly alter the overall perfect accuracy or deviation rates for robotic-assisted screw placement. However, its use did demonstrate improved outcomes in specific techniques such as PPS and CBT, indicating its potential value in addressing skiving in robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgeries.

Accuracy and Screw Insertion Time of Robotic-Assisted Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of Early, Middle, and Late Phases.

Introduction The purpose of this study was to evaluate robotic-assisted cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw placement. Early, middle, and late phases of robotic-assisted CBT screw placement were compared for accuracy and screw insertion time by comparing time and accuracy in every phase.  Methods A retrospective review was conducted on the initial 40 patients who underwent spinal fusion using CBT screws in one institution from September 2021 to September 2022 utilizing a spine surgery robot system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland). The inclusion criterion was one- or two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Exclusion criteria were 1) patients who underwent posterior-lateral fusion in other segments, 2) patients who underwent additional decompression in other segments, 3) patients who underwent reoperation, and 4) patients with spondylolysis. The deviation of the CBT screw was evaluated on computed tomography (CT) one week after surgery using the Gertzbein-Robbins grade system. The rate of Grade A was considered the perfect accuracy rate, and the rate of penetration of 2 mm or more (Grades C, D, and E) was calculated as the deviation rate. To assess the learning curve, patients were divided into three groups. The first 10 cases were in the early phase group, the subsequent 10 cases were in the middle phase group, and the last 10 cases were in the late phase group. We compared the perfect accuracy rate, deviation rate, operative time, operative time per segment, intraoperative blood loss, registration time, and screw insertion time among the three groups. Results Thirty patients met the criteria. Overall, the perfect accuracy (Grade A) rate of the screw was 95.3% and the deviation rate was 1.4%. The perfect accuracy rate was 90.4% in the early phase, 95.5% in the middle phase, and 100% in the late phase. The deviation rate was 3.8% in the early phase, 0% in the middle phase, and 0% in the late phase, and there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups. Among the three groups, the operative time, the operative time per segment, the intraoperative blood loss, and the registration time were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the screw insertion time among the three groups, but it decreased with experience (early phase: 156.9 ± 54.7 sec, middle phase: 139.9 ± 41.6 sec, and late phase: 106.4 ± 39.9 sec, p=0.060). The screw insertion time of the late phase tended to be shorter than that of the early phase (p=0.052). Conclusions The deviation rate of robotic-assisted CBT screw placement with one- or two-level PLIF was 1.4%, which was highly accurate. The deviation rate was 3.8% in the early phase, 0% in the middle phase, and 0% in the late phase. Although the deviation rate was low even in the early period, the screw insertion time in the early 10 cases tended to be longer than that in the late 10 cases. After passing the experience of 10 cases, this study concluded that robotic-assisted CBT screw placement was proficient.