Robot-Assisted Cortical Bone Trajectory Insertion of Pedicle Screws: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. E171-E171
Author(s):  
Justice O Agyei ◽  
Asham Khan ◽  
Patrick K Jowdy ◽  
Timothy E O’Connor ◽  
Joshua E Meyers ◽  
...  

Abstract Robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion has been slowly gaining popularity in the spine surgery community. In previous studies, robotics has been shown to increase accuracy and reduce complication rates compared to other navigation technologies, although those studies have been conducted using traditional trajectories for pedicle screw insertion. We present a surgical video in which a robotics system (Mazor X; Mazor Robotics Ltd, Caesarea, Israel) was used to create cortical bone trajectories for the insertion of the screws. The patient in this case is a 52-yr-old woman with severe L4-5 disc herniation requiring a transforaminal interbody fusion with the insertion of pedicle screws. The robotic system's scan-and-plan technique was utilized, in which an intraoperative computed tomography (CT) scan generates a real-time operative plan. Other techniques for inserting pedicle screws using cortical bone trajectories include CT navigation and fluoroscopic guidance. These techniques allow the surgeon to manually direct the screw under precise guidance in multiple planes, although the surgeon is still using all 6 degrees of freedom the human hand provides. With robotic guidance, a pilot hole is drilled, which eliminates 4 of 6 degrees of freedom, which can potentially reduce the risk of misplaced screws. To our knowledge, this is the first video demonstrating pedicle screw insertion through cortical bone trajectories using robotic guidance. Future studies are warranted to compare cortical bone trajectory insertion using different navigation techniques to determine the long-term efficacy of each technique. The patient gave informed consent for surgery and video recording. Institutional review board approval was deemed unnecessary.

Spine ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (14) ◽  
pp. E851-E856 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keitaro Matsukawa ◽  
Takashi Kato ◽  
Yoshiyuki Yato ◽  
Hiroshi Sasao ◽  
Hideaki Imabayashi ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. E248-E253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keitaro Matsukawa ◽  
Yoshiyuki Yato ◽  
Osamu Nemoto ◽  
Hideaki Imabayashi ◽  
Takashi Asazuma ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keitaro Matsukawa ◽  
Yoshiyuki Yato ◽  
Hideaki Imabayashi ◽  
Naobumi Hosogane ◽  
Takashi Asazuma ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. E8

OBJECTIVE Pedicle screw insertion for stabilization after lumbar fusion surgery is commonly performed by spine surgeons. With the advent of navigation technology, the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion has increased. Robotic guidance has revolutionized the placement of pedicle screws with 2 distinct radiographic registration methods, the scan-and-plan method and CT-to-fluoroscopy method. In this study, the authors aimed to compare the accuracy and safety of these methods. METHODS A retrospective chart review was conducted at 2 centers to obtain operative data for consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted lumbar pedicle screw placement. The newest robotic platform (Mazor X Robotic System) was used in all cases. One center used the scan-and-plan registration method, and the other used CT-to-fluoroscopy for registration. Screw accuracy was determined by applying the Gertzbein-Robbins scale. Fluoroscopic exposure times were collected from radiology reports. RESULTS Overall, 268 patients underwent pedicle screw insertion, 126 patients with scan-and-plan registration and 142 with CT-to-fluoroscopy registration. In the scan-and-plan cohort, 450 screws were inserted across 266 spinal levels (mean 1.7 ± 1.1 screws/level), with 446 (99.1%) screws classified as Gertzbein-Robbins grade A (within the pedicle) and 4 (0.9%) as grade B (< 2-mm deviation). In the CT-to-fluoroscopy cohort, 574 screws were inserted across 280 lumbar spinal levels (mean 2.05 ± 1.7 screws/ level), with 563 (98.1%) grade A screws and 11 (1.9%) grade B (p = 0.17). The scan-and-plan cohort had nonsignificantly less fluoroscopic exposure per screw than the CT-to-fluoroscopy cohort (12 ± 13 seconds vs 11.1 ± 7 seconds, p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS Both scan-and-plan registration and CT-to-fluoroscopy registration methods were safe, accurate, and had similar fluoroscopy time exposure overall.


2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 244-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Iwatsuki ◽  
Toshiki Yoshimine ◽  
Yu-ichiro Ohnishi ◽  
Kosi Ninomiya ◽  
Toshika Ohkawa

JBJS Reviews ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. e13 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. David Kaye ◽  
Srinivas K. Prasad ◽  
Alex R. Vaccaro ◽  
Alan S. Hilibrand

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilo A. Molina ◽  
Nicholas Theodore ◽  
A. Karim Ahmed ◽  
Erick M. Westbroek ◽  
Yigal Mirovsky ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEAugmented reality (AR) is a novel technology that has the potential to increase the technical feasibility, accuracy, and safety of conventional manual and robotic computer-navigated pedicle insertion methods. Visual data are directly projected to the operator’s retina and overlaid onto the surgical field, thereby removing the requirement to shift attention to a remote display. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative accuracy of AR-assisted pedicle screw insertion in comparison to conventional pedicle screw insertion methods.METHODSFive cadaveric male torsos were instrumented bilaterally from T6 to L5 for a total of 120 inserted pedicle screws. Postprocedural CT scans were obtained, and screw insertion accuracy was graded by 2 independent neuroradiologists using both the Gertzbein scale (GS) and a combination of that scale and the Heary classification, referred to in this paper as the Heary-Gertzbein scale (HGS). Non-inferiority analysis was performed, comparing the accuracy to freehand, manual computer-navigated, and robotics-assisted computer-navigated insertion accuracy rates reported in the literature. User experience analysis was conducted via a user experience questionnaire filled out by operators after the procedures.RESULTSThe overall screw placement accuracy achieved with the AR system was 96.7% based on the HGS and 94.6% based on the GS. Insertion accuracy was non-inferior to accuracy reported for manual computer-navigated pedicle insertion based on both the GS and the HGS scores. When compared to accuracy reported for robotics-assisted computer-navigated insertion, accuracy achieved with the AR system was found to be non-inferior when assessed with the GS, but superior when assessed with the HGS. Last, accuracy results achieved with the AR system were found to be superior to results obtained with freehand insertion based on both the HGS and the GS scores. Accuracy results were not found to be inferior in any comparison. User experience analysis yielded “excellent” usability classification.CONCLUSIONSAR-assisted pedicle screw insertion is a technically feasible and accurate insertion method.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Kumar ◽  
Vishnu Baburaj ◽  
Prasoon Kumar ◽  
Sarvdeep Singh Dhatt

AbstractBackgroundPedicle screw insertion is routinely carried out in spine surgery that has traditionally been performed under fluoroscopy guidance. Robotic guidance has recently gained popularity in order to improve the accuracy of screw placement. However, it is unclear whether the use of robotics alters the accuracy of screw placement or clinical outcomes.ObjectivesThis systematic review aims to compare the results of pedicle screws inserted under fluoroscopy guidance, with those inserted under robotic guidance, in terms of both short-term radiographic outcomes, as well as long-term clinical outcomes.MethodsThis systematic review will be conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search will be conducted on the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Ovid with a pre-determined search strategy. A manual bibliography search of included studies will also be done. Original articles in English that directly compare pedicle screw insertion under robotic guidance to those inserted under fluoroscopy guidance will be included. Data on outcomes will be extracted from included studies and analysis carried out with the help of appropriate software.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document