Clemens Neudorfer1, Stefan Hunsche2, Martin Hellmich3, Faycal El Majdoub1, Mohammad Maarouf1. 1. Department for Stereotaxy and Functional Neurosurgery, Center of Neurosurgery, Cologne-Merheim Medical Center (CMMC), University of Witten/Herdecke, Cologne, Germany. 2. Department for Stereotaxy and Functional Neurosurgery, Center of Neurosurgery, Cologne-Merheim Medical Center (CMMC), University of Witten/Herdecke, Cologne, Germany, hunsches@kliniken-koeln.de. 3. Institute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Technological advancements had a serious impact on the evolution of robotic systems in stereotactic neurosurgery over the last three decades and may turn robot-assisted stereotactic neurosurgery into a sophisticated alternative to purely mechanical guiding devices. OBJECTIVES: To compare robot-assisted and conventional frame-based deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery with regard to accuracy, precision, reliability, duration of surgery, intraoperative imaging quality, safety and maintenance using a standardized setup. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of 80 consecutive patients was performed who underwent DBS surgery using either a frame-based mechanical stereotactic guiding device (n = 40) or a stereotactic robot (ROSA Brain, MedTech, Montpellier, France) (n = 40). RESULTS: The mean accuracy of robot-assisted and conventional lead implantation was 0.76 mm (SD: 0.37 mm, range: 0.17-1.52 mm) and 1.11 mm (SD: 0.59 mm, range: 0.10-2.90 mm), respectively. We observed a statistically significant difference in accuracy (p < 0.001) when comparing lateral deviations between both modalities. Furthermore, a statistical significance was observed when investigating the proportion of values exceeding 2.00 mm between both groups (p = 0.013). In 8.75% (n = 7) of conventionally implanted leads, lateral deviations were greater than 2.0 mm. With a maximum value of 1.52 mm, this threshold was never reached during robot-guided DBS. The mean duration of DBS surgery could be reduced significantly (p < 0.001) when comparing robot-guided DBS (mean: 325.1 ± 81.6 min) to conventional lead implantation (mean: 394.8 ± 66.6 min). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted DBS was shown to be superior to conventional lead implantation with respect to accuracy, precision and operation time. Improved quality control, continuous intraoperative monitoring and less manual adjustment likely contribute to the robotic system's reliability allowing high accuracy during lead implantation despite limited experience. Hence, robot-assisted lead implantation can be considered an appropriate and reliable alternative to purely mechanical devices.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Technological advancements had a serious impact on the evolution of robotic systems in stereotactic neurosurgery over the last three decades and may turn robot-assisted stereotactic neurosurgery into a sophisticated alternative to purely mechanical guiding devices. OBJECTIVES: To compare robot-assisted and conventional frame-based deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery with regard to accuracy, precision, reliability, duration of surgery, intraoperative imaging quality, safety and maintenance using a standardized setup. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of 80 consecutive patients was performed who underwent DBS surgery using either a frame-based mechanical stereotactic guiding device (n = 40) or a stereotactic robot (ROSA Brain, MedTech, Montpellier, France) (n = 40). RESULTS: The mean accuracy of robot-assisted and conventional lead implantation was 0.76 mm (SD: 0.37 mm, range: 0.17-1.52 mm) and 1.11 mm (SD: 0.59 mm, range: 0.10-2.90 mm), respectively. We observed a statistically significant difference in accuracy (p < 0.001) when comparing lateral deviations between both modalities. Furthermore, a statistical significance was observed when investigating the proportion of values exceeding 2.00 mm between both groups (p = 0.013). In 8.75% (n = 7) of conventionally implanted leads, lateral deviations were greater than 2.0 mm. With a maximum value of 1.52 mm, this threshold was never reached during robot-guided DBS. The mean duration of DBS surgery could be reduced significantly (p < 0.001) when comparing robot-guided DBS (mean: 325.1 ± 81.6 min) to conventional lead implantation (mean: 394.8 ± 66.6 min). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted DBS was shown to be superior to conventional lead implantation with respect to accuracy, precision and operation time. Improved quality control, continuous intraoperative monitoring and less manual adjustment likely contribute to the robotic system's reliability allowing high accuracy during lead implantation despite limited experience. Hence, robot-assisted lead implantation can be considered an appropriate and reliable alternative to purely mechanical devices.
Authors: Sina R Potel; Sara Marceglia; Sara Meoni; Suneil K Kalia; Rubens G Cury; Elena Moro Journal: Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 6.030
Authors: Amir H Faraji; Vasileios Kokkinos; James C Sweat; Donald J Crammond; R Mark Richardson Journal: Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Andrea Spyrantis; Tirza Woebbecke; Daniel Rueß; Anne Constantinescu; Andreas Gierich; Klaus Luyken; Veerle Visser-Vandewalle; Eva Herrmann; Florian Gessler; Marcus Czabanka; Harald Treuer; Maximilian Ruge; Thomas M Freiman Journal: Front Neurorobot Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 3.493