What Is the Comparison in Robot Time per Screw, Radiation Exposure, Robot Abandonment, Screw Accuracy, and Clinical Outcomes Between Percutaneous and Open Robot-Assisted Short Lumbar Fusion?: A Multicenter, Propensity-Matched Analysis of 310 Patients
- PMID: 34091564
- PMCID: PMC8654274
- DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004132
What Is the Comparison in Robot Time per Screw, Radiation Exposure, Robot Abandonment, Screw Accuracy, and Clinical Outcomes Between Percutaneous and Open Robot-Assisted Short Lumbar Fusion?: A Multicenter, Propensity-Matched Analysis of 310 Patients
Abstract
Study design: Multicenter cohort.
Objective: To compare the robot time/screw, radiation exposure, robot abandonment, screw accuracy, and 90-day outcomes between robot-assisted percutaneous and robot-assisted open approach for short lumbar fusion (1- and 2-level).
Summary of background data: There is conflicting literature on the superiority of robot-assisted minimally invasive spine surgery to open techniques. A large, multicenter study is needed to further elucidate the outcomes and complications between these two approaches.
Methods: We included adult patients (≥18 yrs old) who underwent robot-assisted short lumbar fusion surgery from 2015 to 2019 at four independent institutions. A propensity score matching algorithm was employed to control for the potential selection bias between percutaneous and open surgery. The minimum follow-up was 90 days after the index surgery.
Results: After propensity score matching, 310 patients remained. The mean (standard deviation) Charlson comorbidity index was 1.6 (1.5) and 53% of patients were female. The most common diagnoses included high-grade spondylolisthesis (grade >2) (48%), degenerative disc disease (22%), and spinal stenosis (25%), and the mean number of instrumented levels was 1.5(0.5). The operative time was longer in the open (198 min) versus the percutaneous group (167 min, P value = 0.007). However, the robot time/screw was similar between cohorts (P value > 0.05). The fluoroscopy time/ screw for percutaneous (14.4 s) was longer than the open group (10.1 s, P value = 0.021). The rates for screw exchange and robot abandonment were similar between groups (P value > 0.05). The estimated blood loss (open: 146 mL vs. percutaneous: 61.3 mL, P value < 0.001) and transfusion rate (open: 3.9% vs. percutaneous: 0%, P value = 0.013) were greater for the open group. The 90-day complication rate and mean length of stay were not different between cohorts (P value > 0.05).
Conclusion: Percutaneous robot-assisted spine surgery may increase radiation exposure, but can achieve a shorter operative time and lower risk for intraoperative blood loss for short-lumbar fusion. Percutaneous approaches do not appear to have an advantage for other short-term postoperative outcomes. Future multicenter studies on longer fusion surgeries and the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes are needed.Level of Evidence: 3.
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Similar articles
-
Is there a difference between navigated and non-navigated robot cohorts in robot-assisted spine surgery? A multicenter, propensity-matched analysis of 2,800 screws and 372 patients.Spine J. 2021 Sep;21(9):1504-1512. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.05.015. Epub 2021 May 19. Spine J. 2021. PMID: 34022461
-
Comparison of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: 2-year follow-up.J Robot Surg. 2023 Apr;17(2):473-485. doi: 10.1007/s11701-022-01442-5. Epub 2022 Jul 5. J Robot Surg. 2023. PMID: 35788970
-
Robot-assisted Percutaneous Transfacet Screw Fixation Supplementing Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Procedure: Accuracy and Safety Evaluation of This Novel Minimally Invasive Technique.Orthop Surg. 2019 Feb;11(1):25-33. doi: 10.1111/os.12428. Epub 2019 Feb 18. Orthop Surg. 2019. PMID: 30776856 Free PMC article.
-
How Safe Is Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation in Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Management of 2-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disorders Compared with Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation? Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.World Neurosurg. 2020 Aug;140:357-368. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.05.078. Epub 2020 May 16. World Neurosurg. 2020. PMID: 32428724 Review.
-
Advancements in Robotic-Assisted Spine Surgery.Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2024 Apr;35(2):263-272. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2023.11.005. Epub 2023 Dec 6. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2024. PMID: 38423742 Review.
Cited by
-
Spine Surgical Robotics: Current Status and Recent Clinical Applications.Neurospine. 2023 Dec;20(4):1256-1271. doi: 10.14245/ns.2346610.305. Epub 2023 Dec 31. Neurospine. 2023. PMID: 38171293 Free PMC article.
-
Learning curve of junior surgeons in robot-assisted pedicle screw placement: a comparative cohort study.Eur Spine J. 2024 Jan;33(1):314-323. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-08019-2. Epub 2023 Nov 14. Eur Spine J. 2024. PMID: 37964170 Clinical Trial.
-
Single position robot-assisted pedicle screw placement with S2-alar-iliac fixation in lateral decubitus: cadaveric feasibility study and early clinical experience.Eur Spine J. 2023 Jun 30. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07832-z. Online ahead of print. Eur Spine J. 2023. PMID: 37389697
-
Comparison of accuracy and safety between second-generation TiRobot-assisted and free-hand thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement.BMC Surg. 2022 Jul 15;22(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12893-022-01723-8. BMC Surg. 2022. PMID: 35840958 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Clinical Data Between Patients With Complications and Without Complications After Spinal Tuberculosis Surgery: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Front Surg. 2022 Mar 29;9:815303. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.815303. eCollection 2022. Front Surg. 2022. PMID: 35425806 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Magerl FP. Stabilization ofthe lower thoracic and lumbar spine with external skeletal fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1984; 125–141. - PubMed
-
- Anderson DG, Samartzis D, Shen FH, et al. . Percutaneous instrumentation of the thoracic and lumbar spine. Orthop Clin North Am 2007; 38:401–408. - PubMed
-
- Isaacs RE, Podichetty VK, Santiago P, et al. . Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine 2005; 3:98–105. - PubMed
-
- Choi WW, Green BA, Levi AD. Computer-assisted fluoroscopic targeting system for pedicle screw insertion. Neurosurgery 2000; 47:872–878. - PubMed
-
- Foley KT, Gupta SK. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine: preliminary clinical results. J Neurosurg 2002; 97: (1 suppl): 7–12. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
