Accuracy and Screw Insertion Time of Robotic- Assisted Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of Early, Middle, and Late Phases

被引:6
|
作者
Ueno, Jun [1 ]
Akazawa, Tsutomu [1 ,2 ]
Torii, Yoshiaki [1 ]
Umehara, Tasuku [1 ]
Iinuma, Masahiro [1 ]
Yoshida, Atsuhiro [1 ]
Tomochika, Ken [1 ]
Niki, Hisateru [1 ]
机构
[1] St Marianna Univ, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Sch Med, Kawasaki, Japan
[2] St Marianna Univ, Spine Ctr, Sch Med, Kawasaki, Japan
关键词
robotic spine surgery; posterior lumbar fusion; screw insertion time; deviation rate; accuracy rate; cortical bone trajectory; robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement; TRADITIONAL PEDICLE SCREW; FIXATION;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.32574
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction The purpose of this study was to evaluate robotic-assisted cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw placement. Early, middle, and late phases of robotic-assisted CBT screw placement were compared for accuracy and screw insertion time by comparing time and accuracy in every phase.Methods A retrospective review was conducted on the initial 40 patients who underwent spinal fusion using CBT screws in one institution from September 2021 to September 2022 utilizing a spine surgery robot system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland). The inclusion criterion was one-or two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Exclusion criteria were 1) patients who underwent posterior-lateral fusion in other segments, 2) patients who underwent additional decompression in other segments, 3) patients who underwent reoperation, and 4) patients with spondylolysis. The deviation of the CBT screw was evaluated on computed tomography (CT) one week after surgery using the Gertzbein-Robbins grade system. The rate of Grade A was considered the perfect accuracy rate, and the rate of penetration of 2 mm or more (Grades C, D, and E) was calculated as the deviation rate. To assess the learning curve, patients were divided into three groups. The first 10 cases were in the early phase group, the subsequent 10 cases were in the middle phase group, and the last 10 cases were in the late phase group. We compared the perfect accuracy rate, deviation rate, operative time, operative time per segment, intraoperative blood loss, registration time, and screw insertion time among the three groups.Results Thirty patients met the criteria. Overall, the perfect accuracy (Grade A) rate of the screw was 95.3% and the deviation rate was 1.4%. The perfect accuracy rate was 90.4% in the early phase, 95.5% in the middle phase, and 100% in the late phase. The deviation rate was 3.8% in the early phase, 0% in the middle phase, and 0% in the late phase, and there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups. Among the three groups, the operative time, the operative time per segment, the intraoperative blood loss, and the registration time were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the screw insertion time among the three groups, but it decreased with experience (early phase: 156.9 +/- 54.7 sec, middle phase: 139.9 +/- 41.6 sec, and late phase: 106.4 +/- 39.9 sec, p=0.060). The screw insertion time of the late phase tended to be shorter than that of the early phase (p=0.052).Conclusions The deviation rate of robotic-assisted CBT screw placement with one-or two-level PLIF was 1.4%, which was highly accurate. The deviation rate was 3.8% in the early phase, 0% in the middle phase, and 0% in the late phase. Although the deviation rate was low even in the early period, the screw insertion time in the early 10 cases tended to be longer than that in the late 10 cases. After passing the experience of 10 cases, this study concluded that robotic-assisted CBT screw placement was proficient.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Biportal endoscopic-assisted cortical bone trajectory screw placement and lumbar interbody fusion
    Zhu, Chengyue
    Liang, Jiaming
    Pan, Hao
    Zhang, Wei
    [J]. ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 2024, 166 (01)
  • [2] Biportal endoscopic-assisted cortical bone trajectory screw placement and lumbar interbody fusion
    Chengyue Zhu
    Jiaming Liang
    Hao Pan
    Wei Zhang
    [J]. Acta Neurochirurgica, 166
  • [3] Clinical Outcomes After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison of Cortical Bone Trajectory and Conventional Pedicle Screw Insertion
    Takenaka, Shota
    Mukai, Yoshihiro
    Tateishi, Kosuke
    Hosono, Noboru
    Fuji, Takeshi
    Kaito, Takashi
    [J]. CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2017, 30 (10): : E1411 - E1418
  • [4] Freehand screw insertion technique without image guidance for the cortical bone trajectory screw in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: what affects screw misplacement?
    Ishii, Masayoshi
    Ohnishi, Atsunori
    Yamagishi, Akira
    Ohwada, Tetsuo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2022, 36 (01) : 1 - +
  • [5] Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cortical bone trajectory screw fixation versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion using traditional pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study
    Sakaura, Hironobu
    Miwa, Toshitada
    Yamashita, Tomoya
    Kuroda, Yusuke
    Ohwada, Tetsuo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2016, 25 (05) : 591 - 595
  • [6] Influence of Pedicle Screw Insertion Depth on Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Radiological Significance of Deeper Screw Placement
    Matsukawa, Keitaro
    Konomi, Tsunehiko
    Matsubayashi, Kohei
    Yamane, Junichi
    Yato, Yoshiyuki
    [J]. GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (02) : 470 - 477
  • [7] The comparison of pedicle screw and cortical screw in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective randomized noninferiority trial
    Lee, Gun Woo
    Son, Jung-Hwan
    Ahn, Myun-Whan
    Kim, Ho-Joong
    Yeom, Jin S.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (07): : 1519 - 1526
  • [8] Early cephalad adjacent segment degeneration after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative study between cortical bone trajectory screw fixation and traditional trajectory screw fixation
    Sakaura, Hironobu
    Ikegami, Daisuke
    Fujimori, Takahito
    Sugiura, Tsuyoshi
    Mukai, Yoshihiro
    Hosono, Noboru
    Fuji, Takeshi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2020, 32 (02) : 155 - 159
  • [9] Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Robotic-Assisted Percutaneous Screw Placement: A Case Report
    McVeigh, Luke
    Anokwute, Miracle C.
    Huh, Andrew
    Blucker, Nathaniel
    Lane, Brandon C.
    [J]. CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2022, 14 (02)
  • [10] Comparison of No Tap (two-step) and tapping robotic assisted cortical bone trajectory screw insertion
    Werthmann III, Neil J.
    Gum, Jeffrey L.
    Nagata, Kosei
    Djurasovic, Mladen
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Owens II, R. Kirk
    Crawford III, Charles H.
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01)