Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition

Abstract

The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is unstable and remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for unsatisfactory Renaissance robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. This was a retrospective study of prospective data. From January 2017 to March 2018, 136 robot-assisted pedicle screw placements were performed in our department for spinal diseases, and a total of 874 screws were evaluated. All screws were assessed by the Gertzbein and Robbins classification. A and B were defined as satisfactory. C, D, and E were defined as unsatisfactory. Intraoperative registration failures due to nontechnical reasons or intraoperative adjustment were also defined as unsatisfactory. According to the evaluated results, the screws were divided into the satisfactory group (Group A) and the unsatisfactory group (Group B). The satisfactory rate was defined as satisfactory screws (the screws in Group A)/total screws, and the accurate rate was defined as accuracy screws (the screws in Group A)/the screws implanted by the robot (total screws - failed registration screws - screws adjusted during the operation). The age, sex, BMI, and BMD as well as the type of disease, the degree of vertebral rotation and the type of screw placement (percutaneous implantation or open implantation) were compared between the two groups, with the assessment of potential risk factors for unsatisfactory robot-assisted screw placement using logistic regression. A total of 874 screws were evaluated; there were 759 screws in Group A and 115 screws in Group B. The satisfactory rate was 86.8% (759/874), and the accuracy rate of the robot-placed screws was 94.4% (759/804). After logistic regression analysis, the independent risk factors were identified as obesity (OR 5.357 [95% CI 2.897–9.906], p < 0.01), osteoporosis, vertebral rotation and the presence of congenital scoliosis (OR 9.835 [95% CI 4.279–22.604], p < 0.01), particularly for severe osteoporosis (T < −3.5) and severe vertebral rotation (III-IV). According to the results of this study, obesity, osteoporosis and congenital scoliosis are risk factors for unsatisfactory robot-assisted screw placement. Furthermore, for surgeons in the initial stage of using a robot, we suggest avoiding cases in which a single risk factor or multiple risk factors exist to ensure the safety of the operation and to help augment the confidence of the surgeons.

Operator independent reliability of direct augmented reality navigated pedicle screw placement and rod bending

“…Computer based navigation techniques have shown to have an accuracy of up to 96% [7] and robotic assisted navigation has an accuracy 95-98% [9,10,14].…”

Do robot-related complications influence 1 year reoperations and other clinical outcomes after robot-assisted lumbar arthrodesis? A multicenter assessment of 320 patients

“…In a single-center, retrospective analysis, Zhang et al examined robot failure with the Renaissance system in 76 patients (874 screws) [ 19 ]. There were 39 screws (4.5%) which were adjusted during the operation, and registration failed in two patients (2.8%), both of whom had congenital scoliosis.…”

Radiological and Clinical Differences between Tinavi Orthopedic Robot and O-Arm Navigation System in Thoracolumbar Screw Implantation for Reconstruction of Spinal Stability

“…Although the SpineAssist/Renaissance spinal robot has a high accuracy of pedicle screw placement [ 11 – 14 ], there is still misplacement of guide wires and screws with this device [ 15 , 16 ]. In addition, SpineAssist/Renaissance has some defects, including complex operation and lack of real-time image monitoring [ 17 ]. The Tinavi orthopedic robot system, independently developed in China, has been used in spine, trauma, and other surgical fields.…”