Literature DB >> 24048889

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

Xiaobang Hu1, Isador H Lieberman.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24048889      PMCID: PMC4016454          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3291-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  20 in total

1.  Clinical acceptance and accuracy assessment of spinal implants guided with SpineAssist surgical robot: retrospective study.

Authors:  Dennis P Devito; Leon Kaplan; Rupert Dietl; Michael Pfeiffer; Dale Horne; Boris Silberstein; Mitchell Hardenbrook; George Kiriyanthan; Yair Barzilay; Alexander Bruskin; Dieter Sackerer; Vitali Alexandrovsky; Carsten Stüer; Ralf Burger; Johannes Maeurer; Gordon D Donald; Donald G Gordon; Robert Schoenmayr; Alon Friedlander; Nachshon Knoller; Kirsten Schmieder; Ioannis Pechlivanis; In-Se Kim; Bernhard Meyer; Moshe Shoham
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Bone-mounted miniature robotic guidance for pedicle screw and translaminar facet screw placement: Part I--Technical development and a test case result.

Authors:  Isador H Lieberman; Daisuke Togawa; Mark M Kayanja; Mary K Reinhardt; Alon Friedlander; Nachshon Knoller; Edward C Benzel
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.654

3.  Bone-mounted miniature robotic guidance for pedicle screw and translaminar facet screw placement: part 2--Evaluation of system accuracy.

Authors:  Daisuke Togawa; Mark M Kayanja; Mary K Reinhardt; Moshe Shoham; Alin Balter; Alon Friedlander; Nachshon Knoller; Edward C Benzel; Isador H Lieberman
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.654

4.  Randomized clinical study to compare the accuracy of navigated and non-navigated thoracic pedicle screws in deformity correction surgeries.

Authors:  S Rajasekaran; S Vidyadhara; Perumal Ramesh; Ajoy P Shetty
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Accuracy analysis of pedicle screw placement in posterior scoliosis surgery: comparison between conventional fluoroscopic and computer-assisted technique.

Authors:  Yoshihisa Kotani; Kuniyoshi Abumi; Manabu Ito; Masahiko Takahata; Hideki Sudo; Shigeki Ohshima; Akio Minami
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

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

Authors:  Xiaobang Hu; Donna D Ohnmeiss; Isador H Lieberman
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Computer-assisted anterior spinal surgery for a case of recurrent giant cell tumor.

Authors:  Naoki Shoda; Susumu Nakajima; Atsushi Seichi; Akinori Kan; Motoshige Iwasaki; Tomoaki Kitagawa; Hiroshi Kawaguchi; Kozo Nakamura
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.601

8.  Percutaneous placement of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine using a bone mounted miniature robotic system: first experiences and accuracy of screw placement.

Authors:  Ioannis Pechlivanis; George Kiriyanthan; Martin Engelhardt; Martin Scholz; Sebastian Lücke; Albrecht Harders; Kirsten Schmieder
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 9.  Learning curve using robotic surgery.

Authors:  Sanjeev Kaul; Nikhil L Shah; Mani Menon
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.862

10.  Perioperative course and accuracy of screw positioning in conventional, open robotic-guided and percutaneous robotic-guided, pedicle screw placement.

Authors:  Sven Rainer Kantelhardt; Ramon Martinez; Stefan Baerwinkel; Ralf Burger; Alf Giese; Veit Rohde
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-03-08       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  26 in total

1.  Accuracy of thoracolumbar transpedicular and vertebral body percutaneous screw placement: coupling the Rosa® Spine robot with intraoperative flat-panel CT guidance--a cadaver study.

Authors:  M Lefranc; J Peltier
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2015-10-22

2.  A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity.

Authors:  I Kassite; T Bejan-Angoulvant; H Lardy; A Binet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 4.584

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

Authors:  Xiaobang Hu; Isador H Lieberman
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Comparison of the accuracy between robot-assisted and conventional freehand pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hao Liu; Weikai Chen; Zongyi Wang; Jun Lin; Bin Meng; Huilin Yang
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  Impact of robot-assisted spine surgery on health care quality and neurosurgical economics: A systemic review.

Authors:  Brian Fiani; Syed A Quadri; Mudassir Farooqui; Alessandra Cathel; Blake Berman; Jerry Noel; Javed Siddiqi
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 6.  Percutaneous screw placement in the lumbar spine with a modified guidance technique based on 3D CT navigation system.

Authors:  Ioannis D Siasios; John Pollina; Asham Khan; Vassilios George Dimopoulos
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-12

7.  A multicenter study of the 5-year trends in robot-assisted spine surgery outcomes and complications.

Authors:  Nathan J Lee; Eric Leung; Ian A Buchanan; Matthew Geiselmann; Josephine R Coury; Matthew E Simhon; Scott Zuckerman; Avery L Buchholz; John Pollina; Ehsan Jazini; Colin Haines; Thomas C Schuler; Christopher R Good; Joseph Lombardi; Ronald A Lehman
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2022-03

8.  Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery.

Authors:  Jia-Nan Zhang; Yong Fan; Xin He; Tuan-Jiang Liu; Ding-Jun Hao
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement During Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Isador H Lieberman; Stanley Kisinde; Shea Hesselbacher
Journal:  JBJS Essent Surg Tech       Date:  2020-05-21

10.  Evaluation of K-wireless robotic and navigation assisted pedicle screw placement in adult degenerative spinal surgery: learning curve and technical notes.

Authors:  Fedan Avrumova; Kyle W Morse; Madison Heath; Roger F Widmann; Darren R Lebl
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.