Tag: Robotic surgery

Posted on

Utilization of robotic pars repair for early return to activity in adolescents with symptomatic spondylolysis

J Neurosurg Spine 44:349–354, 2026

This case series from a tertiary academic spine center reports outcomes of robot-assisted percutaneous pars repair in nine adolescents with symptomatic lumbar spondylolysis who failed conservative management. The authors describe a single–midline incision technique using CT-based robotic guidance and a single lagged transdefect screw, detailing operative workflow, implant sizes, and a standardized postoperative rehabilitation protocol.

Results show most patients returned to preinjury or higher activity within months, with low complication rates and radiographic evidence of union in those who obtained CT follow-up. The authors conclude that minimally invasive robotic pars repair is a viable option after failed nonoperative care and advocate timely surgical consultation to potentially accelerate return to sport and avoid progressive spondylolisthesis.

Clinical problem Symptomatic lumbar pars interarticularis fractures (spondylolysis) are a common cause of adolescent low-back pain; nonoperative care with activity modification is standard first-line treatment.

Nonunion risk Despite conservative management, about 20% of patients may progress to symptomatic nonunion, and some can later develop spondylolisthesis that may require fusion.

Study aim Robotic surgical guidance was used to enable percutaneous pars screw placement; the series reports the largest cohort of adolescents treated with robot-assisted pars repair to date.

Design & cohort Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database identified 9 adolescents/young adults (13–25 years) treated with a single-screw pars repair technique.

Technique Using Excelsius robotic planning/registration and intraoperative 3D imaging, bilateral screw trajectories were planned to converge so bilateral pars screws could be placed through a single 1–2 cm midline incision; compression was achieved via a “lag-by-technique” preparation without direct pars visualization/grafting.

Postop protocol Patients walked only for 2 weeks, then added stationary biking for 2 weeks, followed by 4 weeks of sport-directed physical therapy; if tolerated symptom-free, they were cleared for activity (cleared to begin return-to-sport training at 4 weeks).

Outcomes Mean preop activity cessation at consultation was 8.6 ± 10.6 months; at mean follow-up 11.4 ± 9.1 months, 78% had returned to baseline activity or were cleared to return to sport.

Safety/efficacy conclusion Robot-assisted pars repair was reported as a safe, effective option after failed nonoperative care, enabling return to activity in as little as 8 weeks; a single lag-style screw may be clinically effective compared with prior open debridement/bone-grafting approaches.

Posted on

Comparison of accuracy, revision, and perioperative outcomes in robot-assisted spine surgeries: systematic review and meta-analysis

J Neurosurg Spine 41:519–531, 2024

Pedicle screw placement guidance is critical in spinal fusions, and spinal surgery robots aim to improve accuracy and reduce complications. Current literature has yet to compare the relative merits of available robotic systems. In this review, the authors aimed to 1) assess the current state of spinal robotics literature; 2) conduct a meta-analysis of robotic performance based on accuracy, speed, and safety; and 3) offer recommendations for robotic system selection.

METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, the authors conducted a systematic literature review across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus as of April 28, 2022, for studies on approved robots for placing lumbar pedicle screws. Three reviewers screened and extracted data relating to the study characteristics, accuracy rate, intraoperative revisions, and reoperations. Secondary performance metrics included operative time, blood loss, and radiation exposure. The authors statistically compared the performance of the robots using a random-effects model to account for variation within and between the studies. Each robot was also compared with performance benchmarks of traditional techniques including freehand, fluoroscopic, and CT-navigated insertion. Finally, we performed a Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill test to assess for the presence of publication bias.

RESULTS The authors identified 46 studies, describing 4670 patients and 25,054 screws, that evaluated 4 different robotic systems: Mazor X, ROSA, ExcelsiusGPS, and Cirq. The weighted accuracy rates of Gertzbein-Robbins classification grade A or B screws were as follows: ExcelsiusGPS, 98.0%; ROSA, 98.0%; Mazor, 98.2%; and Cirq, 94.2%. No robot was significantly more accurate than the others. However, the accuracy of the ExcelsiusGPS was significantly higher than that of traditional methods, and the accuracies of the Mazor and ROSA were significantly higher than that of fluoroscopy. The intraoperative revision rates were Cirq, 0.55%; ROSA, 0.91%; Mazor, 0.98%; and ExcelsiusGPS, 1.08%. The reoperation rates were Cirq, 0.28%; ExcelsiusGPS, 0.32%; and Mazor, 0.76% (no reoperations were reported for ROSA). Operative times were similar for all robots. Both the ExcelsiusGPS and Mazor were associated with significantly less blood loss than the ROSA. The Cirq had the lowest radiation exposure. Robots tended to be more accurate and generally their use was associated with fewer reoperations and less blood loss than freehand, fluoroscopic, or CT-navigated techniques.

CONCLUSIONS Robotic platforms perform comparably based on key metrics, with high accuracy rates and low intraoperative revision and reoperation rates. The spinal robotics publication rate will continue to accelerate, and choosing a robot will depend on the context of the practice.

Posted on

Robot‑assisted transcerebellar stereotactic approach for brainstem lesion

Acta Neurochirurgica (2024) 166:389

Stereotactic approaches to diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPGs) remain essential due to advances in molecular biology and management, necessitating tissue sampling. Here we present an effective technique with a biopsy by robot-assisted transcerebellar approach.

Method Our procedure was performed using the ROSA robotic system and the OARM CT scan, which provided stereotactic conditions for this transcerebellar approach to brainstem lesions.

Conclusion The robot-assisted transcerebellar stereotactic approach remains essential to provide complications for biopsy of brainstem lesions.

Posted on

Posterolateral lumbar spine fixation and decompression with navigation interfaced with a robotic exoscope with head mounted display

Acta Neurochirurgica (2024) 166:342

Lumbar spine fixation and fusion is currently performed with intraoperative tools such as intraoperative CT scan integrated to navigation system to provide accurate and safe positioning of the screws. The use of microscopic visualization systems enhances visualization and accuracy during decompression of the spinal canal as well.

Methods We introduce a novel setting in microsurgical decompression and fusion of lumbar spine using an exoscope with robotized arm (RoboticScope) interfaced with navigation and head mounted displays.

Conclusion Spinal canal decompression and fusion can effectively be performed with RoboticScope, with significant advantages especially regarding ergonomics.

Posted on

What is the Marginal Cost of Using Robot Assistance or Navigation for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Time-Driven Activity-Based Cost Analysis

Neurosurgery 95:556–565, 2024

Our primary objective was to compare the marginal intraoperative cost of 3 different methods for pedicle screw placement as part of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIFs). Specifically, we used time-driven activity-based costing to compare costs between robot-assisted TLIF (RA-TLIF), TLIF with intraoperative navigation (ION-TLIF), and freehand (non-navigated, nonrobotic) TLIF.

METHODS: Total cost was divided into direct and indirect costs. We identified all instances of RA-TLIF (n = 20), ION-TLIF (n = 59), and freehand TLIF (n = 233) from 2020 to 2022 at our institution. Software was developed to automate the extraction of all intraoperatively used personnel and material resources from the electronic medical record. Total costs were determined through a combination of direct observation, electronic medical record extraction, and interdepartmental collaboration (business operations, sterile processing, pharmacy, and plant operation departments). Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to compare costs between TLIF modalities, accounting for patient-specific factors as well as number of levels fused, surgeon, and hospital site.

RESULTS: The average total intraoperative cost per case for the RA-TLIF, ION-TLIF, and freehand TLIF cohorts was $24 838 ± $10 748, $15 991 ± $6254, and $14 498 ± $6580, respectively. Regression analysis revealed that RA-TLIF had significantly higher intraoperative cost compared with both ION-TLIF ( β -coefficient: $7383 ± $1575, P < .001) and freehand TLIF ( β -coefficient: $8182 ± $1523, P < .001). These cost differences were primarily driven by supply cost. However, there were no significant differences in intraoperative cost between ION-TLIF and freehand TLIF (P = .32).

CONCLUSION: We demonstrate a novel use of time-driven activity-based costing methodology to compare different modalities for executing the same type of lumbar fusion procedure. RA-TLIF entails significantly higher supply cost when compared with other modalities, which explains its association with higher total intraoperative cost. The use of ION, however, does not add extra expense compared with freehand TLIF when accounting for confounders. This might have implications as surgeons and hospitals move toward bundled payments.

Posted on

Surgical Characteristics of Intracranial Biopsy Using a Frameless Stereotactic Robotic Platform: A Single-Center Experience

Operative Neurosurgery 26:502–510, 2024

Cranial robotics are a burgeoning field of neurosurgery. To date, all cranial robotic systems described have been computerized, arm-based instruments that take up significant space in the operating room. The Medtronic Stealth Autoguide robot has a smaller operating room footprint and offers multiaxial, frame-based surgical targeting. The authors set out to define the surgical characteristics of a novel robotic platform for brain biopsy in a large patient cohort.

METHODS: Patients who underwent stereotactic biopsy using the Stealth Autoguide cranial robotic platform from July 2020 to March 2023 were included in this study. Clinical, surgical, and histological data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS: Ninety-six consecutive patients (50 female, 46 male) were included. The mean age at biopsy was 53.7 ± 18.0 years. The mean target depth was 68.2 ± 15.3 mm. The biopsy diagnostic tissue acquisition rate was 100%. The mean time from incision to biopsy tissue acquisition was 15.4 ± 9.9 minutes. Target lesions were located throughout the brain: in the frontal

lobe (n = 32, 33.3%), parietal lobe (n = 21, 21.9%), temporal lobe (n = 22, 22.9%), deep brain nuclei/thalamus (n = 13, 13.5%),

cerebellum (n = 7, 7.3%), and brainstem (n = 1, 1.0%). Most cases were gliomas (n = 75, 78.2%). Patients were discharged home on postoperative day 0 or 1 in 62.5% of cases. A total of 7 patients developed postoperative complications (7.2%).

CONCLUSION: This cranial robotic platform can be used for efficient, safe, and accurate cranial biopsies that allow for reliable diagnosis of intracranial pathology in a minimally invasive setting.

Posted on

Robot-assisted and augmented reality–assisted spinal instrumentation

J Neurosurg Spine 37:299–314, 2022

The use of technology-enhanced methods in spine surgery has increased immensely over the past decade. Here, the authors present the largest systematic review and meta-analysis to date that specifically addresses patient-centered outcomes, including the risk of inaccurate screw placement and perioperative outcomes in spinal surgeries using robotic instrumentation and/or augmented reality surgical navigation (ARSN).

METHODS A systematic review of the literature in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases spanning the last decade (January 2011–November 2021) was performed to present all clinical studies comparing robot-assisted instrumentation and ARSN with conventional instrumentation techniques in lumbar spine surgery. The authors compared these two technologies as they relate to screw accuracy, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative time, length of stay (LOS), perioperative complications, radiation dose and time, and the rate of reoperation.

RESULTS A total of 64 studies were analyzed that included 11,113 patients receiving 20,547 screws. Robot-assisted instrumentation was associated with less risk of inaccurate screw placement (p < 0.0001) regardless of control arm approach (freehand, fluoroscopy guided, or navigation guided), fewer reoperations (p < 0.0001), fewer perioperative complications (p < 0.0001), lower EBL (p = 0.0005), decreased LOS (p < 0.0001), and increased intraoperative time (p = 0.0003). ARSN was associated with decreased radiation exposure compared with robotic instrumentation (p = 0.0091) and fluoroscopy-guided (p < 0.0001) techniques.

CONCLUSIONS Altogether, the pooled data suggest that technology-enhanced thoracolumbar instrumentation is advantageous for both patients and surgeons. As the technology progresses and indications expand, it remains essential to continue investigations of both robotic instrumentation and ARSN to validate meaningful benefit over conventional instrumentation techniques in spine surgery.

Systematic review registration no.: CRD42021283631 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/)

Posted on

Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion in thoracolumbar spinal surgery

J Neurosurg Spine 30:615–622, 2019

The object of this study was to compare the safety and accuracy of pedicle screw placement using the TiRobot system versus conventional fluoroscopy in thoracolumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS Patients with degenerative or traumatic thoracolumbar spinal disorders requiring spinal instrumentation were randomly assigned to either the TiRobot-assisted group (RG) or the freehand fluoroscopy-assisted group (FG) at a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome measure was the accuracy of screw placement according to the Gertzbein-Robbins scale; grades A and B (pedicle breach < 2 mm) were considered clinically acceptable. In the RG, discrepancies between the planned and actual screw placements were measured by merging postoperative CT images with the trajectory planning images. Secondary outcome parameters included proximal facet joint violation, duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to freehand approach in the RG, postoperative hospital stay, and radiation exposure.

RESULTS A total of 1116 pedicle screws were implanted in 234 patients (119 in the FG, and 115 in the RG). In the RG, 95.3% of the screws were perfectly positioned (grade A); the remaining screws were graded B (3.4%), C (0.9%), and D (0.4%). In the FG, 86.1% screws were perfectly positioned (grade A); the remaining screws were graded B (7.4%), C (4.6%), D (1.4%), and E (0.5%). The proportion of clinically acceptable screws was significantly greater in the RG than in the FG (p < 0.01). In the RG, the mean deviation was 1.5 ± 0.8 mm for each screw. The most common direction of screw deviation was lateral in the RG and medial in the FG. Two misplaced screws in the FG required revision surgery, whereas no revision was required in the RG. None of the screws in the RG violated the proximal facet joint, whereas 12 screws (2.1%) in the FG violated the proximal facet joint (p < 0.01). The RG had significantly less blood loss (186.0 ± 255.3 ml) than the FG (217.0 ± 174.3 ml; p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of surgical time and postoperative hospital stay. The mean cumulative radiation time was 81.5 ± 38.6 seconds in the RG and 71.5 ± 44.2 seconds in the FG (p = 0.07). Surgeon radiation exposure was significantly less in the RG (21.7 ± 11.5 μSv) than in the FG (70.5 ± 42.0 μSv; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS TiRobot-guided pedicle screw placement is safe and useful in thoracolumbar spinal surgery. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02890043 (clinicaltrials.gov)

 

Posted on

Robot-Assisted Stereoelectroencephalography

Robot-Assisted Stereoelectroencephalography

Neurosurgery 78:169–180, 2016

Robot-assisted stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) may represent a simplified, precise, and safe alternative to the more traditional SEEG techniques.

OBJECTIVE: To report our clinical experience with robotic SEEG implantation and to define its utility in the management of patients with medically refractory epilepsy.

METHODS: The prospective observational analyses included all patients with medically refractory focal epilepsy who underwent robot-assisted stereotactic placement of depth electrodes for extraoperative brain monitoring between November 2009 and May 2013. Technical nuances of the robotic implantation technique are presented, as well as an analysis of demographics, time of planning and procedure, seizure outcome, in vivo accuracy, and procedure-related complications.

RESULTS: One hundred patients underwent 101 robot-assisted SEEG procedures. Their mean age was 33.2 years. In total, 1245 depth electrodes were implanted. On average, 12.5 electrodes were implanted per patient. The time of implantation planning was 30 minutes on average (range, 15-60 minutes). The average operative time was 130 minutes (range, 45-160 minutes). In vivo accuracy (calculated in 500 trajectories) demonstrated a median entry point error of 1.2 mm (interquartile range, 0.78-1.83 mm) and a median target point error of 1.7 mm (interquartile range, 1.20-2.30 mm). Of the group of patients who underwent resective surgery (68 patients), 45 (66.2%) gained seizure freedom status. Mean follow-up was 18 months. The total complication rate was 4%.

CONCLUSION: The robotic SEEG technique and method were demonstrated to be safe, accurate, and efficient in anatomically defining the epileptogenic zone and subsequently promoting sustained seizure freedom status in patients with difficult-to- localize seizures.

Posted on

Unskilled unawareness and the learning curve in robotic spine surgery

SpineAssist™ robot system

Acta Neurochir (2015) 157:1819–1823

Robotic assistance for the placement of pedicle screws has been established as a safe technique. Nonetheless rare instances of screw misplacement have been reported.The aim of the present retrospective study is to assess whether experience and time affect the accuracy of screws placed with the help of the SpineAssist™ robot system.

Methods Postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans of 258 patients requiring thoracolumbar pedicle screw instrumentation from 2008 to 2013 were reviewed. Overall, 13 surgeons performed the surgeries. A pedicle breach of >3 mm was graded as a misplacement. Surgeons were dichotomised into an early and experienced period in increments of five surgeries.

Results In 258 surgeries, 1,265 pedicle screws were placed with the aid of the robot system. Overall, 1,217 screws (96.2 %) were graded as acceptable. When displayed by surgeon, the development of percent misplacement rates peaked between 5 and 25 surgeries in 12 of 13 surgeons. The overall misplacement rate in the first five surgeries was 2.4%(6/245). The misplacement rate rose to 6.3 % between 11 and 15 surgeries (10/158; p=0.20), and reached a significant peak between 16 and 20 surgeries with a rate of 7.1 % (8/112; p= 0.03). Afterwards, misplacement rates declined.

Conclusions A major peak in screw inaccuracies occurred between cases 10 and 20, and a second, smaller one at about 40 surgeries. One potential explanation could be a transition from decreased supervision (unskilled but aware) to increased confidence of a surgeon (unskilled but unaware) who adopts this new technique prior to mastering it (skilled). We therefore advocate ensuring competent supervision for new surgeons at least during the first 25 procedures of robotic spine surgery to optimise the accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screws.

Posted on

Safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw insertion for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine


Robot-assisted spine surgery

J Neurosurg Spine 20:636–643, 2014

Recent years have been marked by efforts to improve the quality and safety of pedicle screw placement in spinal instrumentation. The aim of the present study is to compare the accuracy of the SpineAssist robot system with conventional fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw placement.

Methods. Ninety-five patients suffering from degenerative disease and requiring elective lumbar instrumentation were included in the study. The robot cohort (Group I; 55 patients, 244 screws) consisted of an initial open robot-assisted subgroup (Subgroup IA; 17 patients, 83 screws) and a percutaneous cohort (Subgroup IB, 38 patients, 161 screws). In these groups, pedicle screws were placed under robotic guidance and lateral fluoroscopic control. In the fluoroscopy-guided cohort (Group II; 40 patients, 163 screws) screws were inserted using anatomical landmarks and lateral fluoroscopic guidance. The primary outcome measure was accuracy of screw placement on the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (Grade A to E and R [revised]). Secondary parameters were duration of surgery, blood loss, cumulative morphine, and length of stay.

Results. In the robot group (Group I), a perfect trajectory (A) was observed in 204 screws (83.6%). The remaining screws were graded B (n = 19 [7.8%]), C (n = 9 [3.7%]), D (n = 4 [1.6%]), E (n = 2 [0.8%]), and R ( n = 6 [2.5%]). In the fluoroscopy-guided group (Group II), a completely intrapedicular course graded A was found in 79.8% (n = 130). The remaining screws were graded B (n = 12 [7.4%]), C (n = 10 [6.1%]), D (n = 6 [3.7%]), and E (n = 5 [3.1%]). The comparison of “clinically acceptable” (that is, A and B screws) was neither different between groups (I vs II [p = 0.19]) nor subgroups (Subgroup IA vs IB [p = 0.81]; Subgroup IA vs Group II [p = 0.53]; Subgroup IB vs Group II [p = 0.20]). Blood loss was lower in the robot-assisted group than in the fluoroscopy-guided group, while duration of surgery, length of stay, and cumulative morphine dose were not statistically different.

Conclusions. Robot-guided pedicle screw placement is a safe and useful tool for assisting spine surgeons in degenerative spine cases. Nonetheless, technical difficulties remain and fluoroscopy backup is advocated.

Posted on

Robotics in Keyhole Transcranial Endoscope-Assisted Microsurgery

Robotics in Keyhole Transcranial Endoscope-Assisted Microsurgery

Operative Neurosurgery 10:84–96, 2014

Over the past decade, advances in image guidance, endoscopy, and tube-shaft instruments have allowed for the further development of keyhole transcranial endoscope-assisted microsurgery, utilizing smaller craniotomies and minimizing exposure and manipulation of unaffected brain tissue. Although such approaches offer the possibility of shorter operating times, reduced morbidity and mortality, and improved longterm outcomes, the technical skills required to perform such surgery are inevitably greater than for traditional open surgical techniques, and they have not been widely adopted by neurosurgeons. Surgical robotics, which has the ability to improve visualization and increase dexterity, therefore has the potential to enhance surgical performance.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of surgical robots in keyhole transcranial endoscopeassisted microsurgery.

METHODS: The technical challenges faced by surgeons utilizing keyhole craniotomies were reviewed, and a thorough appraisal of presently available robotic systems was performed.

RESULTS: Surgical robotic systems have the potential to incorporate advances in augmented reality, stereoendoscopy, and jointed-wrist instruments, and therefore to significantly impact the field of keyhole neurosurgery. To date, over 30 robotic systems have been applied to neurosurgical procedures. The vast majority of these robots are best described as supervisory controlled, and are designed for stereotactic or image-guided surgery. Few telesurgical robots are suitable for keyhole neurosurgical approaches, and none are in widespread clinical use in the field.

CONCLUSION: New robotic platforms in minimally invasive neurosurgery must possess clear and unambiguous advantages over conventional approaches if they are to achieve significant clinical penetration.

Posted on

Pelvic Schwannoma: Robotic Laparoscopic Resection

Pelvic Schwannoma- Robotic Laparoscopic Resection

Neurosurgery 72[ONS Suppl 1]:ons2–ons5, 2013

Schwannoma is a rare benign tumor of peripheral nerves arising from Schwann cells of the ubiquitous nerve sheath.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the operative steps and technical aspects of robotic laparoscopic resection of pelvic schwannoma.

METHODS: We describe 2 patients with pelvic schwannoma: a 34-year-old woman with schwannoma of the right lumbosacral trunk and a 58-year-old woman with schwannoma of a left S1 nerve. Pain was the main symptom in both patients. The diagnosis was confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging and nerve biopsies. Both patients were operated on by robotic laparoscopy.

RESULTS: Lesions were totally enucleated after incising the epineurium. After dissection of the schwannoma, the vascular pedicle and nerve fascicles involved were identified, coagulated, and then sectioned. The remaining fascicles of the nerve were preserved. The postoperative course was uneventful in both patients. With follow-up of 9 and 13 months, both patients obtained complete pain relief with no neurological sequelae. CONCLUSION: Robotic laparoscopic resection of pelvic nerve tumors such as schwannomas is technically feasible.

Proudly powered by WordPress