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