Screw Insertion Time, Fluoroscopy Time, and Operation Time for Robotic-Assisted Lumbar Pedicle Screw Placement Compared With Freehand Technique

被引:5
|
作者
Torii, Yoshiaki [1 ]
Ueno, Jun [1 ]
Umehara, Tasuku [1 ]
Iinuma, Masahiro [1 ]
Yoshida, Atsuhiro [1 ]
Tomochika, Ken [1 ]
Niki, Hisateru [1 ]
Akazawa, Tsutomu [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] St Marianna Univ, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Sch Med, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, Japan
[2] St Marianna Univ Hosp, Spine Ctr, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, Japan
关键词
robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement; spinal navigation; screw insertion time; radiation exposure; fluoroscopy; spine robotic system; freehand technique; lumbar spine pedicle screw placement; robotic-assisted spine; surgery; SURGEONS;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.25039
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 clarify the superiority of robotic-assisted lumbar pedicle screw placement in terms of screw insertion time, fluoroscopy time, and operation time. Methods The subjects were 46 patients who underwent a posterior lumbar interbody fusion with an open procedure for lumbar degenerative disease from April 2021 to February 2022. The robot group contained 29 cases of screw insertion using a spine robotic system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland). The freehand group contained 17 cases of screw insertion with the freehand technique utilizing the conventional C-arm image guidance. The screw insertion time, fluoroscopy time, and operation time were compared between the robot and the freehand group. Results The screw insertion time did not differ significantly between the two groups (robot group: 179.0 +/- 65.2 sec; freehand group: 164.2 +/- 83.4 sec; p = 0.507). The fluoroscopy time was significantly shorter in the robot group (robot group: 28.3 +/- 25.8 sec; freehand group: 67.5 +/- 72.8 sec; p = 0.011). The fluoroscopy time per segment was also significantly shorter in the robot group (robot group: 17.8 +/- 23.0 sec; freehand group: 60.2 +/- 74.8 sec; p = 0.007). The operation time was significantly longer in the robot group (robot group: 249.6 +/- 72.5 min; freehand group: 195.8 +/- 60.1 sec; p = 0.013), but the operation time per segment did not differ significantly between the two groups (robot group: 144.1 +/- 39.0 min; freehand group: 159.7 +/- 34.4 min; p = 0.477). Conclusions The screw insertion time and operation time per segment were similar when employing the spine robotic system compared to the freehand technique; however, the fluoroscopy time was shorter. The fluoroscopy time per segment in the robot group was 29.6% of the time of the freehand group using the C-arm. The surgeon's radiation exposure is thought to be decreased since the spine robotic system shortens the fluoroscopy time.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] 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
  • [2] A Spine Robotic-Assisted Navigation System for Pedicle Screw Placement
    Chen, Hsuan-Yu
    Xiao, Xiu-Yun
    Chen, Chih-Wei
    Chou, Hao-Kai
    Sung, Chen-Yu
    Lin, Feng Huei
    Chen, Po-Quang
    Wong, Tze-hong
    JOVE-JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS, 2020, (159):
  • [3] ROBOTIC-ASSISTED PEDICLE SCREW PLACEMENT DURING SPINE SURGERY
    Lieberman, Isador H.
    Kisinde, Stanley
    Hesselbacher, Shea
    JBJS ESSENTIAL SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2020, 10 (02):
  • [4] Learning curves for robotic-assisted spine surgery: an analysis of the time taken for screw insertion, robot setting, registration, and fluoroscopy
    Akazawa, Tsutomu
    Torii, Yoshiaki
    Ueno, Jun
    Umehara, Tasuku
    Iinuma, Masahiro
    Yoshida, Atsuhiro
    Tomochika, Ken
    Ohtori, Seiji
    Niki, Hisateru
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2024, 34 (01): : 127 - 134
  • [5] Learning curves for robotic-assisted spine surgery: an analysis of the time taken for screw insertion, robot setting, registration, and fluoroscopy
    Tsutomu Akazawa
    Yoshiaki Torii
    Jun Ueno
    Tasuku Umehara
    Masahiro Iinuma
    Atsuhiro Yoshida
    Ken Tomochika
    Seiji Ohtori
    Hisateru Niki
    European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, 2024, 34 : 127 - 134
  • [6] Results of using robotic-assisted navigational system in pedicle screw placement
    Chen, Hsuan-Yu
    Xiao, Xiu-Yun
    Chen, Chih-Wei
    Chou, Hao-Kai
    Sung, Chen-Yu
    Lin, Feng-Huei
    Chen, Po-Quang
    Wong, Tze-Hong
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (08):
  • [7] Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery
    Zhang, Jia-Nan
    Fan, Yong
    He, Xin
    Liu, Tuan-Jiang
    Hao, Ding-Jun
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2021, 45 (06) : 1531 - 1538
  • [8] Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery
    Jia-Nan Zhang
    Yong Fan
    Xin He
    Tuan-Jiang Liu
    Ding-Jun Hao
    International Orthopaedics, 2021, 45 : 1531 - 1538
  • [9] Comparison of the One-Time Accuracy of Simulated Freehand and Navigation Simulated Pedicle Screw Insertion
    Xu, Yun-Feng
    Zhang, Qi
    Le, Xiao-Feng
    Liu, Bo
    He, Da
    Sun, Yu-Qin
    Liu, Ya-Jun
    Yuan, Qiang
    Lang, Zhao
    Han, Xiao-Guang
    Tian, Wei
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2019, 128 : E347 - E354
  • [10] What Is the Learning Curve for Robotic-assisted Pedicle Screw Placement in Spine Surgery?
    Hu, Xiaobang
    Lieberman, Isador H.
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2014, 472 (06) : 1839 - 1844