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
  • [31] Robotic-assisted pancreatic enucleation: Posterior uncinate approach
    Chopra, Asmita
    Ranellone, Nicholas
    Nunns, Geoffrey
    Paniccia, Alessandro
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2024, 76 (08) : 2969 - 2972
  • [32] The posterior approach to robotic-assisted right upper lobectomy
    Oh, Daniel S.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2019, 11 : S1161 - S1162
  • [33] Is bony attachment necessary for dynamic reference frame in navigation-assisted minimally invasive lumbar spine fusion surgery?
    Lin, Hsi-Hsien
    Lu, Yueh-Hsiu
    Chou, Po-Hsin
    Chang, Ming-Chau
    Wang, Shih-Tien
    Liu, Chien-Lin
    COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY, 2019, 24 (01) : 7 - 12
  • [34] Navigation-assisted surgery for tumors of the spine
    Bandiera, S.
    Ghermandi, R.
    Gasbarrini, A.
    Brodano, G. Barbanti
    Colangeli, S.
    Boriani, S.
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2013, 22 : S919 - S924
  • [35] Guidelines for navigation-assisted spine surgery
    Wei Tian
    Bo Liu
    Da He
    Yajun Liu
    Xiaoguang Han
    Jingwei Zhao
    Mingxing Fan
    Frontiers of Medicine, 2020, 14 : 518 - 527
  • [36] Computer Navigation-assisted versus Minimally Invasive TKA Benefits and Drawbacks
    Bonutti, Peter M.
    Dethmers, Daniel
    Ulrich, Slif D.
    Seyler, Thorsten M.
    Mont, Michael A.
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2008, 466 (11) : 2756 - 2762
  • [37] Robotic-Assisted Device in Posterior Spinal Fusion for a High Risk Thoraculombar Fracture in Ankylosing Spondylitis
    Suliman, Ali
    Wollstein, Ronit
    Bernfeld, Benjamin
    Bruskin, Alexander
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2014, 8 (01) : 64 - 68
  • [38] Robotic-Assisted vs Nonrobotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Cost-Utility Analysis
    Garcia, Diogo
    Akinduro, Oluwaseun O.
    De Biase, Gaetano
    Sousa-Pinto, Bernardo
    Jerreld, Daniel J.
    Dholakia, Ruchita
    Borah, Bijan
    Nottmeier, Eric
    Deen, H. Gordon
    Fox, W. Christopher
    Bydon, Mohamad
    Chen, Selby
    Quinones-Hinojosa, Alfredo
    Abode-Iyamah, Kingsley
    NEUROSURGERY, 2022, 90 (02) : 192 - 198
  • [39] Guidelines for navigation-assisted spine surgery
    Tian, Wei
    Liu, Bo
    He, Da
    Liu, Yajun
    Han, Xiaoguang
    Zhao, Jingwei
    Fan, Mingxing
    FRONTIERS OF MEDICINE, 2020, 14 (04) : 518 - 527
  • [40] Navigation-assisted surgery for tumors of the spine
    S. Bandiera
    R. Ghermandi
    A. Gasbarrini
    G. Barbanti Bròdano
    S. Colangeli
    S. Boriani
    European Spine Journal, 2013, 22 : 919 - 924