Robotic-Assisted Versus Navigation-Assisted Posterior Lumbar Fusion

被引:1
|
作者
Gouzoulis, Michael J. [1 ]
Seddio, Anthony E. [1 ]
Winter, Adam D. [1 ]
Jabbouri, Sahir S. [1 ]
Zhu, Justin R. [1 ]
Rubio, Daniel R. [1 ]
Varthi, Arya G. [1 ]
Grauer, Jonathan N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Yale Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed & Rehabil, PO 208071, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
关键词
robotics; navigations; lumbar fusion; pearldiver; ANTERIOR CERVICAL DISKECTOMY; 90-DAY COMPLICATIONS; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; SURGERY; INSTRUMENTATION;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000005032
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Retrospective cohort study. Objective. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative adverse events and reoperations between navigation-assisted and robotic-assisted posterior lumbar fusion. Summary of Background data. Navigation has become increasingly utilized for posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). More recently, robotic-assisted systems have been gaining traction. However, the incremental advantage of these systems has been unclear in the literature. Methods. Patients undergoing one-level to three-level PLF (with or without anterior or posterior interbody fusion) were identified from the 2015 to 2022 M161Ortho PearlDiver Database using CPT codes. Navigation assistance was identified based on CPT coding and robotic assistance was based on ICD-10 procedural coding. Navigation-assisted cases were matched 4:1 to robotic-assisted patients based on age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, number of levels fuse, and concomitant anterior fusion. Incidence of 90-day adverse outcomes were assessed and compared with multivariable logistical regression. Bonferroni correction was applied for multiple testing. Rate of reoperation was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Results. From 2015 to 2022, there has been a significant increase in both navigation-assisted and robotic-assisted lumbar fusions, with navigation-assisted surgery being significantly more common. After matching, there were 2401 navigation-assisted cases and 651 robotic-assisted cases. On multivariate analysis, there were no significant differences in 90-day any, severe, or minor adverse events. There was a significant increase odd of readmissions in the robotic cohort (OR: 1.77, P<0.001). There were no differences in 3-year reoperation rates between the navigation-assisted and robotic-assisted cohorts (95.8% vs. 94.0%, P=0.30). Conclusions. As spinal navigation has been gaining popularity and robotic assistance is starting to be further utilized, the incremental advantage of different techniques may be questioned. While further study and technique evolution are ongoing, the current study was not able to demonstrate 90-day or 3-year incremental advantages for robotics relative to navigation based on the metrics evaluated.
引用
收藏
页码:1483 / 1487
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Posterior Lumbar Fusion-An Analysis of 90-Day Complications and Readmissions
    Malik, Azeem Tariq
    Drain, Joseph P.
    Jones, Jeremy
    Karnes, Jonathan
    Brewster, James
    Ryu, Robert
    Singh, Varun
    Kim, Jeffery
    Khan, Safdar N.
    Yu, Elizabeth
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2021, 152 : E168 - +
  • [2] Robotic-assisted Navigation Bronchoscopy
    Pyarali, Fahim F.
    Hakami-Majd, Niv
    Sabbahi, Wesam
    Chaux, George
    JOURNAL OF BRONCHOLOGY & INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY, 2024, 31 (01) : 70 - 81
  • [3] Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Martinez, Orlando
    Shah, Varunil
    Herring, Eric Z.
    Labak, Collin M.
    Mauria, Rohit
    Smith, Gabriel A.
    ORTHOPAEDIC NURSING, 2025, 44 (01) : 28 - 32
  • [4] Propensity-Matched Comparison of 90-Day Complications in Robotic-Assisted Versus Non-Robotic Assisted Lumbar Fusion
    Yu, Charles C.
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Brown, Morgan E.
    Daniels, Christy L.
    Polly, David W.
    Gum, Jeffrey L.
    SPINE, 2022, 47 (03) : 195 - 200
  • [5] Accuracy of navigation-assisted surgery of the thoracic and lumbar spine
    Arand, M
    Schempf, M
    Hebold, D
    Teller, S
    Kinzl, L
    Gebhard, F
    UNFALLCHIRURG, 2003, 106 (11): : 899 - +
  • [6] Robotic-Assisted Lumbar Fusion: An Effective Technique for Pedicle Screw Placement
    Karasin, Beth
    Rizzo, Gina
    Hardinge, Tara
    Grzelak, Monica
    Eskuchen, Lauren
    Watkinson, Johanna
    AORN JOURNAL, 2022, 115 (03) : 251 - 260
  • [7] Perioperative Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Fluoroscopically Guided Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    De Biase, Gaetano
    Gassie, Kelly
    Garcia, Diogo
    Abode-Iyamah, Kingsley
    Deen, Gordon
    Nottmeier, Eric
    Chen, Selby
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2021, 149 : E570 - E575
  • [8] Perioperative Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Fluoroscopically Guided Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    De Biase, Gaetano
    Gassie, Kelly
    Garcia, Diogo
    Abode-Iyamah, Kingsley
    Deen, Gordon
    Nottmeier, Eric
    Chen, Selby
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2021, 149 : E570 - E575
  • [9] Laparoscopic Versus Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy for Enucleation of Posterior Myomas
    Cameo, T.
    Fung, J.
    Williams, S.
    Flatow, V.
    Rosen, L.
    Zakashansky, K.
    Khalil, S.
    Ascher-Walsh, C.
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2025, 145 (5S): : 56S - 56S
  • [10] VisionKinematics Interaction for Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy Navigation
    Gu, Yun
    Gu, Chuanjia
    Yang, Jie
    Sun, Jiayuan
    Yang, Guang-Zhong
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, 2022, 41 (12) : 3600 - 3610