Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery
- PDF / 3,334,431 Bytes
- 8 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 59 Downloads / 208 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery Jia-Nan Zhang 1 & Yong Fan 1 & Xin He 1 & Tuan-Jiang Liu 1 & Ding-Jun Hao 1 Received: 7 March 2020 / Accepted: 21 September 2020 # SICOT aisbl 2020
Abstract Background The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw implantation is a safe and effective method in lumbar surgery, but it still remains controversial in lumbar revision surgery. This study evaluated the clinical safety and accuracy of robot-assisted versus freehand pedicle screw implantation in lumbar revision surgery. Methods This was a retrospective study. From January 2018 to December 2019, 81 patients underwent posterior lumbar revision surgery in our hospital. Among them, 39 patients underwent revision surgery performed with robot-assisted pedicle screw implantation (Renaissance robotic system), whereas the remaining 42 patients underwent traditional freehand pedicle screw implantation. All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and X-ray before revision surgery. The sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, operative time, blood loss, operative segments, intra-operative fluoroscopy time, and complications were compared between the two groups. The accuracy of pedicle screw implantation was measured on CT scans based on Gertzbein Robbins grading, and the invasion of superior level facet joint was evaluated by Babu’s method. Results There was no statistical difference about the baseline between the two groups (P > 0.05). Although there were no significant differences in operative time and complications between the two groups (P > 0.05), the robot-assisted group had significantly less intra-operative blood loss and shorter intra-operative fluoroscopy times than the freehand group (P < 0.05). In the robot-assisted group, a total of 267 screws were inserted, which were marked as grade A in 250, grade B in 13, grade C in four, and no grade D or E in any screw. In terms of invasion of superior level facet joint, a total of 78 screws were inserted in the robot-assisted group, which were marked as grade 0 in 73, grade 1 in four, grade 2 in one, and grade 3 in zero. By comparison, 288 screws were placed in total in the freehand group, which were rated as grade A in 251, grade B in 28, grade C in eight, grade D in one, and no grade E in any screw. A total of 82 superior level facet joint screws were inserted in freehand group, which were marked as grade 0 in 62, grade one in 18, grade 2 in two, and grade 3 in zero. The robot-assisted technique was statistically superior to the freehand method in the accuracy of screw placement (P < 0.05). Conclusion Compared with freehand screw implantation, in lumbar revision surgery, the Renaissance robot had higher accuracy and safety of pedicle screw implantation, fewer superior level facet joint violations, and less intra-operative blood loss and intraoperative fluoroscopy time. Keywords Lumbar revision surgery . Pedicle screw implantation . Robot-assisted . Freehand El
Data Loading...
