Shutao Gao1, Zhengtao Lv2, Huang Fang3. 1. Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliate Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, 830054, Xinjiang, China. 2. Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. 630105736@qq.com. 3. Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. fanghuangtjh@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Several studies have revealed that robot-assisted technique might improve the pedicle screw insertion accuracy, but owing to the limited sample sizes in the individual study reported up to now, whether or not robot-assisted technique is superior to conventional freehand technique is indefinite. Thus, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials to assess which approach is better. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science, CNKI and WanFang were systematically searched to identify potentially eligible articles. Main endpoints containing the accuracy of pedicle screw implantation and proximal facet joint violation were evaluated as risk ratio (RR) and the associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), while radiation exposure and surgical duration were presented as mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD). Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Six studies involving 158 patients (688 pedicle screws) in robot-assisted group and 148 patients (672 pedicle screws) in freehand group were identified matching our study. The Grade A accuracy rate in robot-assisted group was superior to freehand group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00, 1.06; P = 0.04), but the Grade A + B accuracy rate did not differ between the two groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99, 1.02; P = 0.29). With regard to proximal facet joint violation, the combined results suggested that robot-assisted group was associated with significantly fewer proximal facet joint violation than freehand group (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01, 0.55; P = 0.01). As was the radiation exposure, our findings suggested that robot-assisted technique could significantly reduce the intraoperative radiation time (MD - 12.38, 95% CI - 17.95, - 6.80; P < 0.0001) and radiation dosage (SMD - 0.64, 95% CI - 0.85, - 0.43; P < 0.00001). But the overall surgical duration was longer in robot-assisted group than conventional freehand group (MD 20.53, 95% CI 5.17, 35.90; P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The robot-assisted technique was associated with equivalent accuracy rate of pedicle screw implantation, fewer proximal facet joint violation, less intraoperative radiation exposure but longer surgical duration than freehand technique. Powerful evidence relies on more randomized controlled trials with high quality and larger sample size in the future.
PURPOSE: Several studies have revealed that robot-assisted technique might improve the pedicle screw insertion accuracy, but owing to the limited sample sizes in the individual study reported up to now, whether or not robot-assisted technique is superior to conventional freehand technique is indefinite. Thus, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials to assess which approach is better. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science, CNKI and WanFang were systematically searched to identify potentially eligible articles. Main endpoints containing the accuracy of pedicle screw implantation and proximal facet joint violation were evaluated as risk ratio (RR) and the associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), while radiation exposure and surgical duration were presented as mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD). Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Six studies involving 158 patients (688 pedicle screws) in robot-assisted group and 148 patients (672 pedicle screws) in freehand group were identified matching our study. The Grade A accuracy rate in robot-assisted group was superior to freehand group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00, 1.06; P = 0.04), but the Grade A + B accuracy rate did not differ between the two groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99, 1.02; P = 0.29). With regard to proximal facet joint violation, the combined results suggested that robot-assisted group was associated with significantly fewer proximal facet joint violation than freehand group (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01, 0.55; P = 0.01). As was the radiation exposure, our findings suggested that robot-assisted technique could significantly reduce the intraoperative radiation time (MD - 12.38, 95% CI - 17.95, - 6.80; P < 0.0001) and radiation dosage (SMD - 0.64, 95% CI - 0.85, - 0.43; P < 0.00001). But the overall surgical duration was longer in robot-assisted group than conventional freehand group (MD 20.53, 95% CI 5.17, 35.90; P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The robot-assisted technique was associated with equivalent accuracy rate of pedicle screw implantation, fewer proximal facet joint violation, less intraoperative radiation exposure but longer surgical duration than freehand technique. Powerful evidence relies on more randomized controlled trials with high quality and larger sample size in the future.
Authors: Alexander Mason; Renee Paulsen; Jason M Babuska; Sharad Rajpal; Sigita Burneikiene; E Lee Nelson; Alan T Villavicencio Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2013-12-20
Authors: Naureen Keric; Christian Doenitz; Amer Haj; Izabela Rachwal-Czyzewicz; Mirjam Renovanz; Dominik M A Wesp; Stephan Boor; Jens Conrad; Alexander Brawanski; Alf Giese; Sven R Kantelhardt Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Dimitri Tkatschenko; Paul Kendlbacher; Marcus Czabanka; Georg Bohner; Peter Vajkoczy; Nils Hecht Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Bowen Jiang; Tej D Azad; Ethan Cottrill; Corinna C Zygourakis; Alex M Zhu; Neil Crawford; Nicholas Theodore Journal: Front Med Date: 2019-10-31 Impact factor: 4.592
Authors: Gennadiy A Katsevman; Raven D Spencer; Scott D Daffner; Sanjay Bhatia; Robert A Marsh; John C France; Shari Cui; Patricia Dekeseredy; Cara L Sedney Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 2.210
Authors: Carlos Eduardo Barsotti; Bruno Moreira Gavassi; Francisco Eugenio Prado; Bernardo Nogueira Batista; Raphael de Resende Pratali; Ana Paula Ribeiro; Carlos Eduardo Soares de Oliveira; Ricardo Rodrigues Ferreira Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 2.362