Collaborative spinal robot system for laminectomy: a preliminary study.

OBJECTIVE: The application of robots in the field of pedicle screw placement has achieved great success. However, decompressive laminectomy, a step that is just as critical as pedicle screw placement, does not have a mature robot-assisted system. To address this lack, the authors designed a collaborative spine robot system to assist with laminectomy. In this study, they aimed to investigate the reliability of this novel collaborative spinal robot system and compare it with manual laminectomy (ML). METHODS: Thirty in vitro porcine lumbar vertebral specimens were obtained as experimental bone specimens. Robot-assisted laminectomy (RAL) was performed on the left side of the lamina (n = 30) and ML was performed on the right side (n = 30). The time required for laminectomy on one side, whether the lamina was penetrated, and the remaining thickness of the lamina were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The time required for laminectomy on one side was longer in the RAL group than in the ML group (median 326 seconds [IQR 133 seconds] vs 108.5 seconds [IQR 43 seconds], p < 0.001). In the RAL group, complete lamina penetration occurred twice (6.7%), while in the ML group, it occurred 9 times (30%); the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.045). There was no statistically significant difference in the remaining lamina thickness between the two groups (median 1.035 mm [IQR 0.419 mm] vs 1.084 mm [IQR 0.383 mm], p = 0.842). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study confirm the safety of this novel spinal robot system for laminectomy. However, its efficiency requires further improvement.

Accuracy Evaluation of a Novel Spinal Robotic System for Autonomous Laminectomy in Thoracic and Lumbar Vertebrae: A Cadaveric Study.

BACKGROUND: The main function of robots in spine surgery is to assist with pedicle screw placement. Laminectomy, which is as important as pedicle screw placement, lacks a mature robot-assisted system. The aims of this study were to introduce the first autonomous laminectomy robot, to explore the feasibility of autonomous robotic laminectomy, and to validate its accuracy using a cadaveric model. METHODS: Forty vertebrae from 4 cadavers were included in the study; 7 thoracic and 3 lumbar vertebrae were randomly selected in each cadaver. The surgeon was able to plan the laminectomy path based on computed tomographic (CT) data before the surgical procedure. The robot performed the laminectomy autonomously, and a postoperative CT scan was made. The deviation of each cutting plane from the plan was quantitatively analyzed, and the accuracy and safety were qualitatively evaluated. The time required for the laminectomy was also recorded. RESULTS: Cuts were performed in 80 laminectomy planes (56 for thoracic vertebrae and 24 for lumbar vertebrae). The mean time for 1-sided laminectomy was 333.59 ± 116.49 seconds, which was shorter for thoracic vertebrae (284.41 ± 66.04 seconds) than lumbar vertebrae (448.33 ± 128.65 seconds) (p < 0.001). The mean time for single-level total laminectomy was 814.05 ± 302.23 seconds, which was also shorter for thoracic vertebrae (690.46 ± 165.74 seconds) than lumbar vertebrae (1,102.42 ± 356.13 seconds) (p = 0.002). The mean deviation of the cutting plane from the plan was 0.67 ± 0.30 mm for the most superior cutting point and 0.73 ± 0.31 mm for the most inferior point. There were no significant differences in the deviation between thoracic vertebrae (0.66 ± 0.26 mm) and lumbar vertebrae (0.67 ± 0.38 mm) at the superior cutting point (p = 0.908) and between thoracic vertebrae (0.72 ± 0.30 mm) and lumbar vertebrae (0.73 ± 0.33 mm) at the inferior cutting point (p = 0.923). In the qualitative analysis of the accuracy of the 80 laminectomy planes, 66 (83%) were classified as grade A, 14 (18%) were grade B, and none was grade C. In the safety analysis, 65 planes (81%) were considered safe and the safety of the other 15 planes (19%) was considered uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirmed the accuracy of this robotic system, supporting its use for laminectomy of thoracolumbar vertebrae. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level V . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.