Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw implantation is a safe and effective method in lumbar surgery, but it still remains controversial in lumbar revision surgery. This study evaluated the clinical safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus freehand pedicle screw implantation in lumbar revision surgery.

Methods

This was a retrospective study. From January 2018 to December 2019, 81 patients underwent posterior lumbar revision surgery in our hospital. Among them, 39 patients underwent revision surgery performed with robot-assisted pedicle screw implantation (Renaissance robotic system), whereas the remaining 42 patients underwent traditional freehand pedicle screw implantation. All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and X-ray before revision surgery. The sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, operative time, blood loss, operative segments, intra-operative fluoroscopy time, and complications were compared between the two groups. The accuracy of pedicle screw implantation was measured on CT scans based on Gertzbein Robbins grading, and the invasion of superior level facet joint was evaluated by Babu’s method.

Results

There was no statistical difference about the baseline between the two groups (P > 0.05). Although there were no significant differences in operative time and complications between the two groups (P > 0.05), the robot-assisted group had significantly less intra-operative blood loss and shorter intra-operative fluoroscopy times than the freehand group (P < 0.05). In the robot-assisted group, a total of 267 screws were inserted, which were marked as grade A in 250, grade B in 13, grade C in four, and no grade D or E in any screw. In terms of invasion of superior level facet joint, a total of 78 screws were inserted in the robot-assisted group, which were marked as grade 0 in 73, grade 1 in four, grade 2 in one, and grade 3 in zero. By comparison, 288 screws were placed in total in the freehand group, which were rated as grade A in 251, grade B in 28, grade C in eight, grade D in one, and no grade E in any screw. A total of 82 superior level facet joint screws were inserted in freehand group, which were marked as grade 0 in 62, grade one in 18, grade 2 in two, and grade 3 in zero. The robot-assisted technique was statistically superior to the freehand method in the accuracy of screw placement (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with freehand screw implantation, in lumbar revision surgery, the Renaissance robot had higher accuracy and safety of pedicle screw implantation, fewer superior level facet joint violations, and less intra-operative blood loss and intra-operative fluoroscopy time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wu M-H, Dubey NK, Li Y-Y, Lee C-Y, Cheng C-C, Shi C-S, Huang T-J (2017) Comparison of minimally invasive spine surgery using intraoperative computed tomography integrated navigation, fluoroscopy, and conventional open surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis: a prospective registry-based cohort study. Spine J 17:1082–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.04.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gao S, Lv Z, Fang H (2018) Robot-assisted and conventional freehand pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Spine J 27:921–930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5333-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Han X, Tian W, Liu Y, Liu B, He D, Sun Y, Han X, Fan M, Zhao J, Xu Y, Zhang Q (2019) Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion in thoracolumbar spinal surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg Spine:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.10.SPINE18487

  4. Schröder ML, Staartjes VE (2017) Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus 42:E12–E12. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS16534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Molliqaj G, Schatlo B, Alaid A, Solomiichuk V, Rohde V, Schaller K, Tessitore E (2017) Accuracy of robot-guided versus freehand fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion in thoracolumbar spinal surgery. Neurosurg Focus 42:E14–E14. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hyun S-J, Kim K-J, Jahng T-A, Kim H-J (2017) Minimally invasive robotic versus open fluoroscopic-guided spinal instrumented fusions: a randomized controlled trial. Spine 42:353–358. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang JN, Fan Y, Hao DJ (2019) Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition. Sci Rep 9:3025–3025. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40057-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE (1990) Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine 15:11–14

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Babu R, Mehta AI, Brown CR, Isaacs RE, Bagley CA, Gottfried ON (2012) Comparison of superior level facet joint violations during open and percutaneous pedicle screw placement. Neurosurgery 12(9):S47–S47

    Google Scholar 

  10. Devito DP, Kaplan L, Dietl R, Pfeiffer M, Horne D, Silberstein B, Hardenbrook M, Kiriyanthan G, Barzilay Y, Bruskin A, Sackerer D, Alexandrovsky V, Stüer C, Burger R, Maeurer J, Donald GD, Schoenmayr R, Friedlander A, Knoller N, Schmieder K, Pechlivanis I, Kim I-S, Meyer B, Shoham M (2010) Clinical acceptance and accuracy assessment of spinal implants guided with SpineAssist surgical robot: retrospective study. Spine 35:2109–2115. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d323ab

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Keric N, Eum DJ, Afghanyar F, Rachwal-Czyzewicz I, Renovanz M, Conrad J, Wesp DMA, Kantelhardt SR, Giese A (2017) Evaluation of surgical strategy of conventional vs. percutaneous robot-assisted spinal trans-pedicular instrumentation in spondylodiscitis. J Robot Surg 11:17–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0597-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hu X, Lieberman IH (2014) What is the learning curve for robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery? Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:1839–1844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3291-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee CS, Hwang CJ, Lee S-W, Ahn Y-J, Kim Y-T, Lee D-H, Lee MY (2009) Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 18:1637–1643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1060-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Levin JM, Alentado VJ, Healy AT, Steinmetz MP, Benzel EC, Mroz TE (2018) Superior segment facet joint violation during instrumented lumbar fusion is associated with higher reoperation rates and diminished improvement in quality of life. Clin Spine Surg 31:E36–E41. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yson SC, Sembrano JN, Sanders PC, Santos ERG, Ledonio CGT, Polly DW Jr (2013) Comparison of cranial facet joint violation rates between open and percutaneous pedicle screw placement using intraoperative 3-D CT (O-arm) computer navigation. Spine 38:E251–E258. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827ecbf1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Teles AR, Paci M, Gutman G, Abduljabbar FH, Ouellet JA, Weber MH, Golan JD (2018) Anatomical and technical factors associated with superior facet joint violation in lumbar fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 28:173–180. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.6.SPINE17130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kim H-J, Jung W-I, Chang B-S, Lee C-K, Kang K-T, Yeom JS (2017) A prospective, randomized, controlled trial of robot-assisted vs freehand pedicle screw fixation in spine surgery. Int J Med Robot 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1779

  18. Khan MH, Rihn J, Steele G, Davis R, Lee JY (2006) Postoperative management protocol for incidental dural tears during degenerative lumbar spine surgery: a review of 3,183 consecutive degenerative lumbar cases. Spine 31:2609–2613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yoshihara H, Chatterjee D, Paulino CB, Errico TJ (2016) Revision surgery for “real” recurrent lumbar disk herniation: a systematic review. Clin Spine Surg 29:111–118. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tormenti MJ, Maserati MB, Bonfield CM, Gerszten PC, Moossy JJ, Kanter AS, Spiro RM, Okonkwo DO (2012) Perioperative surgical complications of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a single-center experience. Journal of neurosurgery Spine 16:44–50. https://doi.org/10.3171/2011.9.SPINE11373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tian W, Han X, Liu B, Liu Y, Hu Y, Han X, Xu Y, Fan M, Jin H (2014) A robot-assisted surgical system using a force-image control method for pedicle screw insertion. PLoS One 9:e86346–e86346. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086346

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Roser F, Tatagiba M, Maier G (2013) Spinal robotics: current applications and future perspectives. Neurosurgery 72(Suppl 1):12–18. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e318270d02c

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Spine Surgery, Hong Hui Hospital, Xi’an Jiaotong University, No. 76 Nanguo Road, Nanshao gate, Xi’an, 710054, Shaanxi Province, China

    Jia-Nan Zhang, Yong Fan, Xin He, Tuan-Jiang Liu & Ding-Jun Hao

Authors
  1. Jia-Nan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yong Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xin He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tuan-Jiang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ding-Jun Hao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ding-Jun Hao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study (optional).

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(XLSX 44 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, JN., Fan, Y., He, X. et al. Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 45, 1531–1538 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04825-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04825-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation