Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
Published in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 2/2019

01-06-2019 | Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (W Hsu, Section Editor)

Robotic Guidance in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: a Review of Recent Literature and Commentary on a Developing Technology

Authors: Justin D. Stull, John J. Mangan, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Gregory D. Schroeder

Published in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS) and robotic technology are growing in popularity and are increasing utilized in combination. The purpose of this review is to identify the current successes, potential drawbacks, and future directions of robotic guidance for MIS compared to traditional techniques.

Recent Findings

Recent literature highlights successful incorporation of robotic guidance in MIS as a consistently accurate method for pedicle screw placement. With a short learning curve and low complication rates, robot guidance may also reduce the use of fluoroscopy, operative time, and length of hospital stay.

Summary

Recent literature suggests that incorporating robotic guidance in MIS improves the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion and may have added benefits both intra- and postoperatively for the patient and provider. Future research should focus on direct comparison between MIS with and without robotic guidance.
Literature
1.
Pilecki MA, McGuire BB, Jain U, Kim JYS, Nadler RB. National multi-institutional comparison of 30-day postoperative complication and readmission rates between open Retropubic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy using NSQIP. J Endourol. 2014;28(4):430–6.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Fan G, Han R, Zhang H, He S, Chen Z. Worldwide research productivity in the field of minimally invasive spine surgery: a 20-year survey of publication activities. Spine. 2017;42(22):1717–22.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Lu VM, Kerezoudis P, Gilder HE, McCutcheon BA, Phan K, Bydon M. Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine. 2017;42(3):E177–85.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Goldstein CL, Macwan K, Sundararajan K, Rampersaud YR. Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review. Clin Orthop. 2014;472(6):1727–37.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Wu M-H, Dubey NK, Li Y-Y, Lee C-Y, Cheng C-C, Shi C-S, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive spine surgery using intraoperative computed tomography integrated navigation, fluoroscopy, and conventional open surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis: a prospective registry-based cohort study. Spine J. 2017;17(8):1082–90.CrossRef
7.
Overley SC, Cho SK, Mehta AI, Arnold PM. Navigation and robotics in spinal surgery: where are we now? Neurosurgery. 2017;80(3S):S86–99.CrossRef
8.
Nathoo N, Cavuşoğlu MC, Vogelbaum MA, Barnett GH. In touch with robotics: neurosurgery for the future. Neurosurgery. 2005;56(3):421–33 discussion 421-433.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE. Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine. 1990;15(1):11–4.CrossRef
10.
Fan Y, Du JP, Liu JJ, Zhang JN, Qiao HH, Liu SC, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement comparing robot-assisted technology and the free-hand with fluoroscopy-guided method in spine surgery: an updated meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(22):e10970.CrossRef
11.
van Dijk JD, van den Ende RPJ, Stramigioli S, Köchling M, Höss N. Clinical pedicle screw accuracy and deviation from planning in robot-guided spine surgery: robot-guided pedicle screw accuracy. Spine. 2015;40(17):E986–91.CrossRef
12.
Molliqaj G, Schatlo B, Alaid A, Solomiichuk V, Rohde V, Schaller K, et al. Accuracy of robot-guided versus freehand fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion in thoracolumbar spinal surgery. Neurosurg Focus. 2017;42(5):E14.CrossRef
13.
Fan Y, Du J, Zhang J, Liu S, Xue X, Huang Y, et al. Comparison of accuracy of pedicle screw insertion among 4 guided technologies in spine surgery. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:5960–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Kim H-J, Jung W-I, Chang B-S, Lee C-K, Kang K-T, Yeom JS. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial of robot-assisted vs freehand pedicle screw fixation in spine surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2017;13(3).
15.
Hyun S-J, Kim K-J, Jahng T-A, Kim H-J. Minimally invasive robotic versus open fluoroscopic-guided spinal instrumented fusions: a randomized controlled trial. Spine. 2017;42(6):353–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Yu L, Chen X, Margalit A, Peng H, Qiu G, Qian W. Robot-assisted vs freehand pedicle screw fixation in spine surgery - a systematic review and a meta-analysis of comparative studies. Int J Med Robot. 2018;14(3):e1892.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Ringel F, Stüer C, Reinke A, Preuss A, Behr M, Auer F, et al. Accuracy of robot-assisted placement of lumbar and sacral pedicle screws: a prospective randomized comparison to conventional freehand screw implantation. Spine. 2012;37(8):E496–501.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Kim H-J, Lee SH, Chang B-S, Lee C-K, Lim TO, Hoo LP, et al. Monitoring the quality of robot-assisted pedicle screw fixation in the lumbar spine by using a cumulative summation test. Spine. 2015;40(2):87–94.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Menger RP, Savardekar AR, Farokhi F, Sin A. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the integration of robotic spine technology in spine surgery. Neurospine. 2018;15(3):216–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Keric N, Doenitz C, Haj A, Rachwal-Czyzewicz I, Renovanz M, Wesp DMA, et al. Evaluation of robot-guided minimally invasive implantation of 2067 pedicle screws. Neurosurg Focus. 2017;42(5):E11.CrossRef
21.
Schröder ML, Staartjes VE. Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus. 2017;42(5):E12.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kim H-J, Kang K-T, Chun H-J, Hwang JS, Chang B-S, Lee C-K, et al. Comparative study of 1-year clinical and radiological outcomes using robot-assisted pedicle screw fixation and freehand technique in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Int J Med Robot. 2018;14(4):e1917.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Park SM, Kim HJ, Lee SY, Chang BS, Lee CK, Yeom JS. Radiographic and clinical outcomes of robot-assisted posterior pedicle screw fixation: two-year results from a randomized controlled trial. Yonsei Med J. 2018;59(3):438–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Urakov TM, Chang KH-K, Burks SS, Wang MY. Initial academic experience and learning curve with robotic spine instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus. 2017;42(5):E4.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hu X, Lieberman IH. What is the learning curve for robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement in spine surgery? Clin Orthop. 2014;472(6):1839–44.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Macke JJ, Woo R, Varich L. Accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the pediatric population. J Robot Surg. 2016;10(2):145–50.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Solomiichuk V, Fleischhammer J, Molliqaj G, Warda J, Alaid A, von Eckardstein K, et al. Robotic versus fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw insertion for metastatic spinal disease: a matched-cohort comparison. Neurosurg Focus. 2017;42(5):E13.CrossRef
28.
Keric N, Eum DJ, Afghanyar F, Rachwal-Czyzewicz I, Renovanz M, Conrad J, et al. Evaluation of surgical strategy of conventional vs. percutaneous robot-assisted spinal trans-pedicular instrumentation in spondylodiscitis. J Robot Surg. 2017;11(1):17–25.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Alaid A, von Eckardstein K, Smoll NR, Solomiichuk V, Rohde V, Martinez R, et al. Robot guidance for percutaneous minimally invasive placement of pedicle screws for pyogenic spondylodiscitis is associated with lower rates of wound breakdown compared to conventional fluoroscopy-guided instrumentation. Neurosurg Rev. 2018;41(2):489–96.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Roser F, Tatagiba M, Maier G. Spinal robotics: current applications and future perspectives. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(Suppl 1):12–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Robotic Guidance in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: a Review of Recent Literature and Commentary on a Developing Technology
Authors
Justin D. Stull
John J. Mangan
Alexander R. Vaccaro
Gregory D. Schroeder
Publication date
01-06-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine / Issue 2/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1935-9748
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-019-09558-2

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 2/2019 Go to the issue

Pediatric Orthopedics (B Heyworth, Section Editor)

Current concepts in neuromuscular scoliosis

Pediatric Orthopedics (B Heyworth, Section Editor)

Evolving Understanding of and Treatment Approaches to Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis

Distal Radius and Wrist Fractures (E Shin, Section Editor)

Complications in the Management of Distal Radius Fractures: How Do We Avoid them?

Distal Radius and Wrist Fractures (E Shin, Section Editor)

Fragment-Specific Fixation in Distal Radius Fractures

ACL: Risk Factors, Outcomes, Preventions (R Gallo, Section Editor)

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Medial Collateral Ligament Knee Injuries: Anatomy, Diagnosis, Management Recommendations, and Return to Sport

Outcomes Research in Orthopedics (O Ayeni, Section Editor)

Sources, Quality, and Reported Outcomes of Superior Capsular Reconstruction: a Systematic Review