Interaction of Ibuprofen and Other Structurally Related NSAIDs with the Sodium-Coupled Monocarboxylate Transporter SMCT1 (SLC5A8)

S. Itagaki,E. Gopal,Lina Zhuang,Y. Fei,S. Miyauchi,P. Prasad,V. Ganapathy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-006-0023-1

IF: 4.58

2006-06-01

Pharmaceutical Research

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Flattening the learning curve - Early experience of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery

Vidyadhara Srinivasa,Balamurugan Thirugnanam,Madhava Pai Kanhangad,Abhishek Soni,Anjana Kashyap,Alia Vidyadhara,Sharath K Rao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2024.06.011

2024-06-13

Abstract:Aims and objectives: To determine accuracy of pedicle screws placed by freehand, fluoroscopy-assistance and robotic-assistance with intraoperative image acquisition, and determine the presence of learning curve in robotic spine surgery in a prospective single centre study. Materials and methods: In a prospective study, a total of 1120 pedicle screws were placed in Freehand group (n = 175), 1250 screws were placed in fluoroscopy-assisted group (n = 172), and 1225 screws were inserted in Robotic-assisted group(n = 180). Surgical parameters and screw accuracy were analyzed between the three groups. The preoperative plan was overlapped with post operative O-arm scan to determine if the screws were executed as planned. Results: The frequency of clinically acceptable screw placement (Gertzbein and Robbins grade A, B) in the Freehand, Fluoroscopy-assisted, and Robotic-assisted groups were 97.7 %, 98.6 %, and 99.34 % respectively. Higher pedicle screw accuracy, and lower blood loss were seen with robotic assistance. There was no significant difference in these parameters between surgeries commencing before and after 2 p.m. We found no statistically significant differences between the planned and executed screw trajectories in robotic assisted group irrespective of surgical experience. Conclusion: The third-generation robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement system, used in conjunction with intraoperative 3D O-arm imaging, consistently lowered blood loss and increased accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine. It also has easy adaptability into spine practice with minimal learning curve.
The pedicle screw accuracy using a robotic system and measured by a novel three-dimensional method

Marcelo Oppermann,Vahagan Karapetyan,Shaurya Gupta,Joel Ramjist,Priscila Oppermann,Victor X D Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-04206-5

2023-09-20

Abstract:Robotics in medicine is associated with precision, accuracy, and replicability. Several robotic systems are used in spine surgery. They are all considered shared-control systems, providing "steady-hand" manipulation instruments. Although numerous studies have testified to the benefits of robotic instrumentations, they must address their true accuracy. Our study used the Mazor system under several situations and compared the spatial accuracy of the pedicle screw (PS) insertion and its planned trajectory. We used two cadaveric specimens with intact spinal structures from C7 to S1. PS planning was performed using the two registration methods (preopCT/C-arm or CT-to-fluoroscopy registration). After planning, the implant spatial orientation was defined based on six anatomic parameters using axial and sagittal CT images. Two surgical open and percutaneous access were used to insert the PS. After that, another CT acquisition was taken. Accuracy was classified into optimal, inaccurate and unacceptable according to the degree of screw deviation from its planning using the same spatial orientation method. Based on the type of spatial deviation, we also classified the PS trajectory into 16 pattern errors. Seven (19%) out of 37 implanted screws were considered unacceptable (deviation distances > 2.0 mm or angulation > 5°), and 14 (38%) were inaccurate (> 0.5 mm and ≤ 2.0 mm or > 2.5° and ≤ 5°). CT-to-fluoroscopy registration was superior to preopCT/C-arm (average deviation in 0.9 mm vs. 1.7 mm, respectively, p < 0.003), and percutaneous was slightly better than open but did not reach significance (1.3 mm vs. 1.7 mm, respectively). Regarding pattern error, the tendency was to have more axial than sagittal shifts. Using a quantitative method to categorize the screw 3D position, only 10.8% of the screws were considered unacceptable. However, with a more rigorous concept of inaccuracy, almost half were non-optimal. We also identified that, unlike some previous results, the O-arm registration delivers more accurate implants than the preopCT/C-arm method.
Comparison of Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Insertion Among 4 Guided Technologies in Spine Surgery

Yong Fan,Jinpeng Du,Jianan Zhang,Shichang Liu,Xukai Xue,Yunfei Huang,Jing Zhang,Dingjun Hao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.905713

2017-12-16

Abstract:BACKGROUND As an available new tool for spinal surgery, robotic technology holds great potential and has been demonstrated to have better clinical outcomes compared with traditional techniques. However, it has not been compared with other assisted tools for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. This article focused on studying such variances. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 176 pedicle screws were inserted in 39 patients using a spine robot (group 1), 134 screws were implanted in 28 patients using navigational template (group 2), 234 screws were implanted in 51 patients by O-arm-based navigation (group 3), and 346 screws were implanted in 72 patients by fluoroscopy-guided assistance (group 4). The screw position was evaluated using postoperative scans according to Rampersaud A to D classification, and other secondary data were also collected. RESULTS "Perfect" pedicle screw insertion (Grade A) was 90.34%, 91.79%, 84.19%, and 65.03% of groups 1-4, respectively. "Clinically acceptable" screw implantation (Grade A+B) was 94.32%, 95.52, 90.60%, and 78.03% in groups 1-4, respectively. Deviation sagittal (°) respectively was 3±9, 2±10, 4±7, and 10±8° in groups 1-4, respectively. Deviation transversal (°) screw insertion was 3±8, 3±7, 4±9, and 8±13° in groups 1-4, respectively. Statistical analysis showed group 1 had no significant difference in the accuracy of "Perfect and Clinical acceptable" as well as deviation sagittal or transversal, respectively, compared with groups 2 and 3 but not group 4. CONCLUSIONS Robotic-assistance technology no clear advantage in terms of accuracy compared to the navigation template or O-arm systems for screw implantation, but it significantly reduced adverse events, fluoroscopy time per screw, postoperative stay, and blood loss.
Pedicle screw accuracy in clinical utilization of minimally invasive navigated robot-assisted spine surgery

Arnold B. Vardiman,David J. Wallace,Neil R. Crawford,Jessica R. Riggleman,Leigh A. Ahrendtsen,Charles G. Ledonio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-00994-3

2019-07-19

Journal of Robotic Surgery

Abstract:In the emerging field of robot-assisted spine surgery, the radiographic evaluation of pedicle screw accuracy in clinical application is an area of high interest. This study describes the pedicle screw accuracy of the first 56 consecutive cases in which navigated robotic assistance was used in a private practice clinical setting. A retrospective, Institutional Review Board-exempt review of the first 56 navigated robot-assisted spine surgery cases was performed. Pedicle screw malposition, reposition, and return to operating room (OR) rates were collected. A CT-based Gertzbein and Robbins system (GRS) was used to classify pedicle screw accuracy. In the first 56 robotic cases, 356 total pedicle screws were placed. Eight screws were placed without the robot due to surgeon discretion. Of the 348 pedicle screws inserted by navigated robotic guidance, only 2.6% (9/348) were repositioned, resulting in a 97.4% (339/348) successful screw placement rate. The average age was 64, and 48% were female. Average body mass index was 31 kg/m2. Based on the GRS CT-based grading, 97.7% (340/348) were graded A or B, 1.7% (6/348) screws were graded C, and only 0.6% (2/348) of screws were graded D. Two complications, explantation of interbody and vacuum-assisted wound closure, were reported as requiring a return to the OR, but these were not related to robotic guidance or pedicle screws. This study demonstrated a high level of accuracy (97.7%) in the first 56 cases using navigated, robot-assisted surgery based on the GRS. There were two non-screw-related complications requiring return to the operating room.
Robot-assisted spine surgery: feasibility study through a prospective case-matched analysis

Nicolas Lonjon,Emilie Chan-Seng,Vincent Costalat,Benoit Bonnafoux,Matthieu Vassal,Julien Boetto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3758-8

IF: 2.721

2015-01-10

European Spine Journal

Abstract:PurposeWhile image guidance and neuronavigation have enabled a more accurate placement of pedicle implants, they can inconvenience the surgeon. Robot-assisted placement of pedicle screws appears to overcome these disadvantages. However, recent data concerning the superiority of currently available robots in assisting spinal surgeons are conflicting. The aim of our study was to evaluate the percentage of accurately placed pedicle screws, inserted using a new robotic-guidance system.Method20 Patients were operated on successively by the same surgeon using robotic assistance (ROSA™, Medtech) (Rosa group 10 patients, n = 40 screws) or by the freehand conventional technique (Freehand group 10 patients, n = 50 screws). Patient characteristics as well as the duration of the operation and of exposure to X rays were recorded.ResultsThe mean age of patients in each group (RG and FHG) was 63 years. Mean BMI and operating time among the RG and FHG were, respectively, 26 and 27 kg/m2, and 187 and 119 min. Accurate placement of the implant (score A and B of the Gertzbein Robbins classification) was achieved in 97.3 % of patients in the RG (n = 36) and in 92 % of those in the FHG (n = 50). Four implants in the RG were placed manually following failed robotic assistance.ConclusionWe report a higher rate of precision with robotic as compared to the FH technique. Providing assistance by permanently monitoring the patient’s movements, this image-guided tool helps more accurately pinpoint the pedicle entry point and control the trajectory. Limitations of the study include its small sized and non-randomized sample. Nevertheless, these preliminary results are encouraging for the development of new robotic techniques for spinal surgery.

clinical neurology,orthopedics
Level-specific Comparison of 3D Navigated and Robotic Arm-Guided Screw Placement: An Accuracy Assessment of 1210 Pedicle Screws in Lumbar Surgery

Tomoyuki Asada,Tejas Subramanian,Chad Z. Simon,Nishtha Singh,Takashi Hirase,Kasra Araghi,Amy Z. Lu,Eric Mai,Yeo Eun Kim,Olivia Tuma,Myles R J Allen,Eric Kim,Maximilian Korsun,Joshua Zhang,Cole Kwas,James Dowdell,Sravisht Iyer,Sheeraz A. Qureshi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.05.013

IF: 4.297

2024-06-07

The Spine Journal

Abstract:Background Context Robotic spine surgery, utilizing 3D imaging and robotic arms, has been shown to improve the accuracy of pedicle screw placement compared to conventional methods, although its superiority remains under debate. There are few studies evaluating the accuracy of 3D navigated versus robotic-guided screw placement across lumbar levels, addressing anatomical challenges to refine surgical strategies and patient safety. Purpose This study aims to investigate the pedicle screw placement accuracy between 3D navigation and robotic arm-guided systems across distinct lumbar levels. Study Design A retrospective review of a prospectively collected registry Patient Sample Patients undergoing fusion surgery with pedicle screw placement in the prone position, using either via 3D image navigation only or robotic arm guidance Outcome Measures Radiographical screw accuracy was assessed by the postoperative computed tomography (CT) according to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, particularly focused on accuracy at different lumbar levels. Methods Accuracy of screw placement in the 3D navigation (Nav group) and robotic arm guidance (Robo group) was compared using Chi-squared test/Fisher's exact test with effect size measured by Cramer's V, both overall and at each specific lumbosacral spinal level. Results A total of 321 patients were included (Nav, 157; Robo, 189) and evaluated 1210 screws (Nav, 651; Robo 559). The Robo group demonstrated significantly higher overall accuracy (98.6 vs. 93.9%; P<0.001, V=0.25). This difference of no breach screw rate was signified the most at the L3 level (No breach screw: Robo 91.3 vs. 57.8%, P<0.001, V=0.35) followed by L4 (89.6 vs. 64.7%, P<0.001, V=0.28), and L5 (92.0 vs. 74.5%, P<0.001, V=0.22). However, screw accuracy at S1 was not significant between the groups (81.1 vs. 72.0%, V=0.10). Conclusion This study highlights the enhanced accuracy of robotic arm-guided systems compared to 3D navigation for pedicle screw placement in lumbar fusion surgeries, especially at the L3, L4, and L5 levels. However, at the S1 level, both systems exhibit similar effectiveness, underscoring the importance of understanding each system's specific advantages for optimization of surgical complications.

clinical neurology,orthopedics
A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study Comparing 3 Different Spine Pedicle Screw Fixation Methods: Freehand, Fluoroscopy-Guided, and Robot-Assisted Techniques

Yoon Ha Hwang,Byeong-Jin Ha,Hyung Cheol Kim,Byung Ho Lee,Jeong-Yoon Park,Dong-Kyu Chin,Seong Yi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2448036.018

2024-03-31

Neurospine

Abstract:Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery.Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate.Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age.Conclusion: This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

surgery,clinical neurology
Fully automated determination of robotic pedicle screw accuracy and precision utilizing computer vision algorithms

Benjamin N Groisser,Ankush Thakur,Howard J Hillstrom,Akshitha Adhiyaman,Colson Zucker,Jerry Du,Matthew Cunningham,M Timothy Hresko,Ram Haddas,John Blanco,Hollis G Potter,Douglas N Mintz,Ryan E Breighner,Jessica H Heyer,Roger F Widmann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02001-w

2024-07-03

Abstract:Historically, pedicle screw accuracy measurements have relied on CT and expert visual assessment of the position of pedicle screws relative to preoperative plans. Proper pedicle screw placement is necessary to avoid complications, cost and morbidity of revision procedures. The aim of this study was to determine accuracy and precision of pedicle screw insertion via a novel computer vision algorithm using preoperative and postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans. Three cadaveric specimens were utilized. Screw placement planning on preoperative CT was performed according to standard clinical practice. Two experienced surgeons performed bilateral T2-L4 instrumentation using robotic-assisted navigation. Postoperative CT scans of the instrumented levels were obtained. Automated segmentation and computer vision techniques were employed to align each preoperative vertebra with its postoperative counterpart and then compare screw positions along all three axes. Registration accuracy was assessed by preoperatively embedding spherical markers (tantalum beads) to measure discrepancies in landmark alignment. Eighty-eight pedicle screws were placed in 3 cadavers' spines. Automated registrations between pre- and postoperative CT achieved sub-voxel accuracy. For the screw tip and tail, the mean three-dimensional errors were 1.67 mm and 1.78 mm, respectively. Mean angular deviation of screw axes from plan was 1.58°. For screw mid-pedicular accuracy, mean absolute error in the medial-lateral and superior-inferior directions were 0.75 mm and 0.60 mm, respectively. This study introduces automated algorithms for determining accuracy and precision of planned pedicle screws. Our accuracy outcomes are comparable or superior to recent robotic-assisted in vivo and cadaver studies. This computerized workflow establishes a standardized protocol for assessing pedicle screw placement accuracy and precision and provides detailed 3D translational and angular accuracy and precision for baseline comparison.
Comparison of the Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Using a Fluoroscopy-Assisted Free-Hand Technique with Robotic-Assisted Navigation Using an O-Arm or 3D C-Arm in Scoliosis Surgery

Chao Li,Hao Li,Junxiao Su,Zheng Wang,Donglai Li,Yonghao Tian,Suomao Yuan,Lianlei Wang,Xinyu Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682221143076

2022-12-03

Global Spine Journal

Abstract:Global Spine Journal, Ahead of Print. Study DesignRetrospective.ObjectivesTo report and compare the application of robotic-assisted navigation with an O-arm or three-dimensional (3D) C-arm-assisted pedicle screw insertion in scoliosis surgery, and compare with free-hand technique.MethodsOne hundred and forty-four scoliosis patients were included in this study. Ninety-two patients underwent robotic-assisted pedicle screw insertion (Group A), and 52 patients underwent freehand fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw insertion (Group B). Group A was further divided into Subgroup AI (n = 48; robotic-assisted navigation with an O-arm) and Subgroup AII (n = 44; robotic-assisted navigation with a 3D C-arm). The evaluated clinical outcomes were operation time, blood loss, radiation exposure, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications. The clinical outcomes, coronal and sagittal scoliosis parameters and the accuracy of the pedicle screw placement were assessed.ResultsThere were no significant differences in blood loss and postoperative hospital stay between Groups A and B (P = .406, P = .138, respectively). Radiation exposure for patients in Group A (Subgroups AI or AII) was higher than that in Group B (P < .005), and Subgroup AI had higher patient radiation exposure compared with Subgroup AII (P < .005). The operation time in Subgroup AII was significantly longer than that in Subgroup AI and Group B (P = .016, P = .032, respectively). The proportion of clinically acceptable screws was higher in Group A (Subgroups AI or AII) compared with Group B (P < .005).ConclusionsRobotic-assisted navigation with an O-arm or 3D C-arm effectively increased the accuracy and safety in scoliosis surgery. Compared with robotic-assisted navigation with a 3D C-arm, robotic-assisted navigation with an O-arm was more efficient intraoperatively.

clinical neurology,orthopedics
The safety and accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw internal fixation for spine disease

Weishang Li,Gaoyu Li,Wenting Chen,Lin Cong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.910.bjr-2020-0064.r2

IF: 4.41

2020-10-01

Bone and Joint Research

Abstract:Aims The aim of this study was to systematically compare the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted (RA) technique with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted (CT) pedicle screw insertion for spine disease. Methods A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and WANFANG for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the safety and accuracy of RA compared with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion for spine disease from 2012 to 2019. This meta-analysis used Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance method with mixed-effects model for heterogeneity, calculating the odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The results of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, and risk of bias were analyzed. Results Ten RCTs with 713 patients and 3,331 pedicle screws were included. Compared with CT, the accuracy rate of RA was superior in Grade A with statistical significance and Grade A + B without statistical significance. Compared with CT, the operating time of RA was longer. The difference between RA and CT was statistically significant in radiation dose. Proximal facet joint violation occurred less in RA than in CT. The postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of RA was smaller than that of CT, and there were some interesting outcomes in our subgroup analysis. Conclusion RA technique could be viewed as an accurate and safe pedicle screw implantation method compared to CT. A robotic system equipped with optical intraoperative navigation is superior to CT in accuracy. RA pedicle screw insertion can improve accuracy and maintain stability for some challenging areas. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(10):653–666.

orthopedics,cell & tissue engineering
Robotic-navigated assistance in spine surgery

Frederik Abel,Fedan Avrumova,Samuel N Goldman,Celeste Abjornson,Darren R Lebl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.105B5.BJJ-2022-0810.R3

2023-05-01

Abstract:The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, as well as intraoperative factors, radiation exposure, and complication rates in adult patients with degenerative disorders of the thoracic and lumbar spines who have undergone robotic-navigated spinal surgery using a contemporary system. The authors reviewed the prospectively collected data on 196 adult patients who had pedicle screws implanted with robot-navigated assistance (RNA) using the Mazor X Stealth system between June 2019 and March 2022. Pedicle screws were implanted by one experienced spinal surgeon after completion of a learning period. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was determined using intraoperative 3D fluoroscopy. A total of 1,123 pedicle screws were implanted: 1,001 screws (89%) were placed robotically, 63 (6%) were converted from robotic placement to a freehand technique, and 59 (5%) were planned to be implanted freehand. Of the robotically placed screws, 942 screws (94%) were determined to be Gertzbein and Robbins grade A with median deviation of 0.8 mm (interquartile range 0.4 to 1.6). Skive events were noted with 20 pedicle screws (1.8%). No adverse clinical sequelae were noted in the 90-day follow-up. The mean fluoroscopic exposure per screw was 4.9 seconds (SD 3.8). RNA is highly accurate and reliable, with a low rate of abandonment once mastered. No adverse clinical sequelae occurred after implanting a large series of pedicle screws using the latest generation of RNA. Understanding of patient-specific anatomical features and the real-time intraoperative identification of risk factors for suboptimal screw placement have the potential to improve accuracy further.
Comprehensive Error Analysis for Robotic-assisted Placement of Pedicle Screws in Pediatric Spinal Deformity: The Initial Learning Curve

Kyle W Morse,Madison Heath,Fedan Avrumova,Christopher Defrancesco,Peter D Fabricant,Darren R Lebl,Roger F Widmann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000001842

2021-08-01

Abstract:Background: Surgical navigation improves pedicle screw insertion accuracy and reliability. Robotic-assisted spinal surgery and screw placement has not been fully assessed in pediatric patients with spine deformity undergoing posterior spinal fusion. The purpose of this study was to describe the learning curve for robotically assisted pedicle screw placement in pediatric patients. Methods: A retrospective review on a consecutive series of the first 19 pediatric patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion by a single surgeon using robotic navigation was performed. Demographics, curve parameters, pedicle diameter, vertebral rotation, and additional outcome measures were recorded. Screw position was assessed with calibrated intraoperative 3-dimensional fluoroscopic images. All complications of planned and placed robotically placed screws were recorded. Results: A total of 194 left-sided screws were planned as robot-assisted. One hundred sixty-eight of the robotically planned screws (86.6%) were placed with robot assistance; 29 robotically planned screws (15.0%) were abandoned or converted to freehand. The mean time per robotically placed screw was 3.6±2.4 minutes. Fifteen breaches (8.9%) and 1 anterior perforation occurred with 2 critical (>2 to 4 mm) breaches, 1 was associated with a durotomy, and both occurred in the first case. There were no intraoperative/postoperative neuromonitoring changes and no sequela from the durotomy. Six breaches occurred in the first case. The odds ratio of obtaining a breach in screws with a matched trajectory was 0.275 (95% confidence interval: 0.089-0.848). Conclusions: Screw time and accuracy improved and the number of breaches decreased after 10 cases. This series had 2 critical breaches (between 2 and 4 mm) on the first case. Overall, excluding the 2 critical breaches, 98.8% of robotically executed screws were placed without a critical breach, which is comparable to previous pediatric deformity studies. Caution should be exercised during the initial training period to avoid complications as experience and training lead to an improved understanding of surgical planning, skive, and soft-tissue pressure on the end-effector all of which can impact accuracy of robotically assisted pedicle screw placement. Level of evidence: Case Series, IV.
The Arrival of Robotics in Spine Surgery: A Review of the Literature

Alexander Ghasem,Akhil Sharma,Dylan N Greif,Milad Alam,Motasem Al Maaieh,Dylan N. Greif

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002695

IF: 3.241

2019-10-04

Spine

Abstract:Study Design. Systematic review. Objective. The authors aim to review comparative outcome measures between robotic and free-hand spine surgical procedures including: accuracy of spinal instrumentation, radiation exposure, operative time, hospital stay, and complication rates. Summary of Background Data. Misplacement of pedicle screws in conventional open as well as minimally invasive surgical procedures has prompted the need for innovation and allowed the emergence of robotics in spine surgery. Before incorporation of robotic surgery in routine practice, demonstration of improved instrumentation accuracy, operative efficiency, and patient safety are required. Methods. A systematic search of the PubMed, OVID-MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases was performed for articles relevant to robotic assistance of pedicle screw placement. Inclusion criteria were constituted by English written randomized control trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies involving robotic instrumentation in the spine. Following abstract, title, and full-text review, 32 articles were selected for study inclusion. Results. Intrapedicular accuracy in screw placement and subsequent complications were at least comparable if not superior in the robotic surgery cohort. There is evidence supporting that total operative time is prolonged in robot-assisted surgery compared to conventional free-hand. Radiation exposure appeared to be variable between studies; radiation time did decrease in the robot arm as the total number of robotic cases ascended, suggesting a learning curve effect. Multilevel procedures appeared to tend toward earlier discharge in patients undergoing robotic spine surgery. Conclusion. The implementation of robotic technology for pedicle screw placement yields an acceptable level of accuracy on a highly consistent basis. Surgeons should remain vigilant about confirmation of robotic-assisted screw trajectory, as drilling pathways have been shown to be altered by soft tissue pressures, forceful surgical application, and bony surface skiving. However, the effective consequence of robot-assistance on radiation exposure, length of stay, and operative time remains unclear and requires meticulous examination in future studies. Level of Evidence: 4

clinical neurology,orthopedics
Blushing and the philosophy of mind

M. Bunge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphysparis.2007.11.008

2007-07-01

Journal of Physiology-Paris

Abstract:
Suppression of Chemically Induced Apoptosis but Not Necrosis of Renal Proximal Tubular Epithelial (LLC-PK1) Cells by Focal Adhesion Kinase (FAK)

B. van de Water,Floor Houtepen,M. Huigsloot,I. Tijdens

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M102091200

IF: 5.485

2001-09-28

Journal of Biological Chemistry

Abstract:Decreased phosphorylation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is associated with loss of focal adhesions and actin stress fibers and precedes the onset of apoptosis in renal epithelial cells caused by nephrotoxicants (Van de Water, B., Nagelkerke, J. F., and Stevens, J. L. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 13328–13337). The role of FAK in the control of apoptosis caused by nephrotoxicants was further investigated in LLC-PK1 cells that were stably transfected with either green fluorescent protein (GFP)-FAK or dominant negative acting deletion mutants of FAK, GFP-FAT, and GFP-FRNK. GFP-FAT and GFP-FRNK delayed the formation of focal adhesions and prevented the localization of endogenous (phosphorylated) FAK at these sites. GFP-FAT and GFP-FRNK overexpression potentiated the onset of apoptosis caused by the nephrotoxicant dichlorovinyl-cysteine. This was associated with an increased activation of caspase-3. GFP-FAT also potentiated apoptosis caused by doxorubicin but not cisplatin. The potentiation of apoptosis by GFP-FAT was related to an almost complete dephosphorylation of FAK; this did not occur in cells overexpressing only GFP. This dephosphorylation was associated with a pronounced loss of focal adhesion organization in GFP-FAT cells, in association with loss of tyrosine phosphorylation of paxillin. In conclusion, the data indicate an important role of cell-matrix signaling in the control of chemically induced apoptosis; loss of FAK activity caused by toxic chemicals results in perturbations of focal adhesion organization with a subsequent inactivation of associated (signaling) molecules and loss of survival signaling.
Safety of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery: Experience from the initial 125 cases

Tsutomu Akazawa,Yoshiaki Torii,Jun Ueno,Tasuku Umehara,Masahiro Iinuma,Atsuhiro Yoshida,Ken Tomochika,Seiji Ohtori,Hisateru Niki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2023.06.003

Abstract:Background: The present study aimed to evaluate the safety of robot-assisted screw placement in 125 cases after introducing a spinal robotics system and to identify the situations where deviation was likely to occur. Methods: The subjects were 125 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted screw placement using a spinal robotics system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic) from April 2021 to January 2023. The 1048 screws placed with robotic assistance were evaluated. We investigated intraoperative adverse events of the robotics system and complications occurring within 30 days after surgery. We evaluated screw accuracy and deviation and compared them for vertebral levels, screw insertion methods (open traditional pedicle screw [Open-PS], cortical bone trajectory screw [CBT], percutaneous pedicle screw [PPS], and S2 alar iliac screw [S2AIS]), diagnosis, and phases of surgical cases. Results: The deviation rate of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery was 2.2%. Complications were reoperation due to implant-related neurological deficit in 0.8% and surgical site infection in 0.8%. There was significant difference in the deviation rate between vertebral levels. The deviation rate of the T1-T4 level was high at 10.0%. There was significant difference in the deviation rate between Open-PS, CBT, PPS, and S2AIS. The PPSs had a high deviation rate of 10.3%. The deviation rates were not significantly different between patients with and without deformity. The deviation rate did not change depending on the experience of surgical cases, and the deviation rate was favorable from the onset. Conclusion: Although the robotic-assisted screw placement was safe, we should be extra vigilant when placing screws in the upper thoracic region (deviation rate 10.0%) and when using PPSs (deviation rate 10.3%).
Pedicle Screw Placement with Augmented Reality Versus Robotic-Assisted Surgery

Franziska C S Altorfer,Michael J Kelly,Fedan Avrumova,Marco D Burkhard,Jiaqi Zhu,Frederik Abel,Frank P Cammisa,Andrew Sama,Mazda Farshad,Darren R Lebl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005147

2024-09-04

Abstract:Study design: This was a single-center prospective clinical and radiographic analysis of pedicle screw instrumentation with Robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) and augmented reality (AR). Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of lumbosacral pedicle screw placement with RAN versus AR. Summary of background data: RAN and AR have demonstrated superior accuracy in lumbar pedicle screw placement compared to conventional free-hand techniques. RAN and AR techniques both tout specific advantages over their counterparts, but to date, no study has directly compared the two technologies regarding pedicle screw accuracy. Patients and methods: Patients who underwent RAN or head-mounted AR navigated lumbosacral (L1-S1) pedicle screw placement for degenerative conditions were included. Screw accuracy was assessed by two independent reviewers on intraoperative 3D fluoroscopic scans using the Gertzbein and Robbins scale. A generalized linear mixed model was applied to evaluate the relationship between the screw placement technique and accuracy. Results: 212 patients undergoing lumbosacral instrumentation with a total of 1,211 pedicle screws placed using RAN (n=108; screws= 827) or AR (n=104; screws= 384). Overall, Grade A was achieved in 92.6% of screws. No significant difference was found between RAN and AR screw placement regarding the incidence of accurate (Grade-A and -B screws; RAN n=824; 99.6% and AR n=379, 98.7%) versus inaccurate screws (Grade-C and -D screws; RAN n=3, 0.4% and AR n=5, 1.3%). When comparing "optimal" Grade-A screws (RAN n= 787, 95.2%, AR n=345, 89.8%) versus all other screws (B, C, and D), significantly higher accuracy was achieved using RAN (P=0.001). Conclusion: RAN and AR both achieved high accuracy in lumbosacral pedicle screw placement, proving reliable for this procedure. However, RAN resulted in significantly more Grade-A screw placements than AR.
Clinical application of spinal robot in cervical spine surgery: safety and accuracy of posterior pedicle screw placement in comparison with conventional freehand methods

Lu-Ping Zhou,Ren-Jie Zhang,Wen-Kui Zhang,Liang Kang,Kai-Xuan Li,Hua-Qing Zhang,Chong-Yu Jia,Yin-Shun Zhang,Cai-Liang Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-023-02027-y

IF: 2.8

2023-05-12

Neurosurgical Review

Abstract:The novel robot-assisted (RA) technique has been utilized increasingly to improve the accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement. Although the clinical application of the RA technique has been investigated in several case series and comparative studies, the superiority and safety of RA over conventional freehand (FH) methods remain controversial. Meanwhile, the intra-pedicular accuracy of the two methods has not been compared for patients with cervical traumatic conditions. This study aimed to compare the rate and risk factors of intra-pedicular accuracy of RA versus the conventional FH approach for posterior pedicle screw placement in cervical traumatic diseases. A total of 52 patients with cervical traumatic diseases who received cervical screw placement using RA (26 patients) and FH (26 patients) techniques were retrospectively included. The primary outcome was the intra-pedicular accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement according to the Gertzbin–Robbins scale. Secondary outcome parameters included surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospital stay, and complications. Moreover, the risk factors that possibly affected intra-pedicular accuracy were assessed using univariate analyses. Out of 52 screws inserted using the RA method, 43 screws (82.7%) were classified as grade A, with the remaining 7 (13.5%) and 2 (3.8%) screws classified as grades B and C. In the FH cohort, 60.8% of the 79 screws were graded A, with the remaining screws graded B (21, 26.6%), C (8, 10.1%), and D (2, 2.5%). The RA technique showed a significantly higher rate of optimal intra-pedicular accuracy than the FH method ( P = 0.008), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of clinically acceptable accuracy ( P = 0.161). Besides, the RA technique showed remarkably longer surgery time, less postoperative drainage, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and equivalent intraoperative blood loss and complications than the FH technique. Furthermore, the univariate analyses showed that severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane ( P = 0.003) and shorter width of the lateral mass at the inferior margin of the posterior arch ( P = 0.014) were risk factors related to the inaccuracy of C1 screw placement. The diagnosis of HRVA ( P < 0.001), severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane ( P < 0.001), short pedicle width ( P < 0.001), and short pedicle height ( P < 0.001) were risk factors related to the inaccuracy of C2 screw placement. RA cervical pedicle screw placement was associated with a higher rate of optimal intra-pedicular accuracy to the FH technique for patients with cervical traumatic conditions. The severe obliquity of the lateral atlantoaxial joint in the coronal plane independently contributed to high rates of the inaccuracy of C1 and C2 screw placements. RA pedicle screw placement is safe and useful for cervical traumatic surgery.

surgery,clinical neurology
Performance of a hybrid decision feedback equalizer structure for CAP-based DSL systems

G. Im,Kyu-Min Kang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/78.934148

IF: 4.875

2001-08-01

IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing

Abstract:We study the performance of a class of derision feedback equalizer (DFE) structures for high-speed digital transmission systems. We first present mathematical formulation of minimum mean-square error (MMSE) and the optimum tap coefficients for various finite-length phase-splitting equalizers over the loop in the presence of colored noise, such as near-end crosstalk (NEXT) and far-end crosstalk (FEXT). The performance of the equalizers is also analyzed in the presence of narrowband interference and the channel reflections introduced by bridged taps. The hybrid-type DFE (H-DFE) is presented as a practical equalizer structure for these applications. The results of analysis show that the H-DFE has advantages in the performance and/or in the implementation complexity as compared with the existing DFE structures. An additional advantage of the H-DFE is in the transmission systems that employ the precoding technique. The precoding for the H-DFE allows the system to track small changes in the channel.
Improved Accuracy of Cervical Spinal Surgery with Robot-Assisted Screw Insertion: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study.

Mingxing Fan,Yajun Liu,Da He,Xiaoguang Han,Jingwei Zhao,Fangfang Duan,Bo Liu,Wei Tian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003258

2020-01-01

Abstract:STUDY DESIGN Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. OBJECTIVE To compare robot-assisted and conventional implantation techniques by evaluating the accuracy and safety of implanting screws in cervical vertebrae. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Cervical spinal surgery is difficult and dangerous as screw misplacement might lead not only to decreased stability but also neurological, vascular, and visceral injuries. A new robot-assisted surgical procedure has been introduced to improve the accuracy of implant screw positioning. METHODS We randomly assigned 135 patients with newly diagnosed cervical spinal disease and who required screw fixation using either robot-assisted or conventional fluoroscopy-assisted cervical spinal surgery. The primary outcomes were the discrepancies between the planned trajectories and the actual screw positions. RESULTS Altogether, 127 patients underwent the assigned intervention (61 robot-assisted and 66 conventional fluoroscopy-assisted). The baseline characteristics including the screw types, were similar in the two groups. Altogether, 390 screws were planed and placed in the cervical vertebrae, and 94.9% were acceptable. The robot-assisted group had a better screw placement accuracy than the conventional fluoroscopy-assisted group with associated p values <0.001 [0.83 (0.44, 1.29) vs 1.79 (1.41, 2.50) mm]. The Gertzbein and Robbins scales also showed a significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the robot-assisted group experienced significantly less blood loss during surgery than the conventional fluoroscopy-assisted group [200 (50, 375) vs 350 (100, 500) ml; p=0.002] and shorter length of stay after surgery (p = 0.021). These two groups did not differ significantly regarding the duration of the operation (p = 0.525). Neurological injury occurred in one case in the conventional fluoroscopy-assisted group. CONCLUSIONS The accuracy and clinical outcomes of cervical spinal surgery using the robot-assisted technique tended to be superior to those with the conventional fluoroscopy-assisted technique in this prospective, randomized, controlled trial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2.

Interaction of Ibuprofen and Other Structurally Related NSAIDs with the Sodium-Coupled Monocarboxylate Transporter SMCT1 (SLC5A8)

Flattening the learning curve - Early experience of robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery

The pedicle screw accuracy using a robotic system and measured by a novel three-dimensional method

Comparison of Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Insertion Among 4 Guided Technologies in Spine Surgery

Pedicle screw accuracy in clinical utilization of minimally invasive navigated robot-assisted spine surgery

Robot-assisted spine surgery: feasibility study through a prospective case-matched analysis

Level-specific Comparison of 3D Navigated and Robotic Arm-Guided Screw Placement: An Accuracy Assessment of 1210 Pedicle Screws in Lumbar Surgery

A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study Comparing 3 Different Spine Pedicle Screw Fixation Methods: Freehand, Fluoroscopy-Guided, and Robot-Assisted Techniques

Fully automated determination of robotic pedicle screw accuracy and precision utilizing computer vision algorithms

Comparison of the Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Using a Fluoroscopy-Assisted Free-Hand Technique with Robotic-Assisted Navigation Using an O-Arm or 3D C-Arm in Scoliosis Surgery

The safety and accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw internal fixation for spine disease

Robotic-navigated assistance in spine surgery

Comprehensive Error Analysis for Robotic-assisted Placement of Pedicle Screws in Pediatric Spinal Deformity: The Initial Learning Curve

The Arrival of Robotics in Spine Surgery: A Review of the Literature

Blushing and the philosophy of mind

Suppression of Chemically Induced Apoptosis but Not Necrosis of Renal Proximal Tubular Epithelial (LLC-PK1) Cells by Focal Adhesion Kinase (FAK)

Safety of robotic-assisted screw placement for spine surgery: Experience from the initial 125 cases

Pedicle Screw Placement with Augmented Reality Versus Robotic-Assisted Surgery

Clinical application of spinal robot in cervical spine surgery: safety and accuracy of posterior pedicle screw placement in comparison with conventional freehand methods

Performance of a hybrid decision feedback equalizer structure for CAP-based DSL systems

Improved Accuracy of Cervical Spinal Surgery with Robot-Assisted Screw Insertion: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study.