Simultaneous Robotic Single-Position Surgery With Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Software Planning: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

Minimally Invasive L4-5 Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Robot-Assisted Single-Position Posterior Fixation: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

We present here a 58-year-old female patient with L4-5 spondylolisthesis, who underwent a minimally invasive L4-5 oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with robot-assisted bilateral posterior instrumented fixation in a single lateral position (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic). There has been interest in detailed video-based descriptions of single-position surgery with lateral approach interbody fusions, either in the prone or lateral decubitus position.1-6 Particularly, the addition of robotics has been shown to help increase overall operating efficiency in the lateral position with reduced case times even with the increased up-front robot setup time.7,8 The OLIF, also known as an anterior-to-psoas approach, allows for single-position posterior fixation and can be very effective at L4-5 where the anatomy of the iliac crest or lumbar plexus does not preclude this surgical corridor the way it could in the transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Clinical outcomes between these 2 lateral approaches have been shown to be very good,9 and OLIF has reduced blood loss while still restoring alignment parameters compared with anterior lumbar interbody fusion, with better fusion and reduced subsidence compared with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.10,11 To our knowledge, this is the first video demonstrating a view of the OLIF approach through a high-definition retractor-based camera (MaxView Camera, Viseon Inc). There is no identifying patient information in this video. The participants and any identifiable individuals consented to publication of his/her image, and the patient consented to the procedure.

Single position L5-S1 lateral ALIF with simultaneous robotic posterior fixation is safe and improves regional alignment and lordosis distribution index

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive single position lateral ALIF at L5-S1 with simultaneous robot-assisted posterior fixation has technical and anatomic considerations that need further description.

METHODS

This is a retrospective case series of single position lateral ALIF at L5-S1 with robotic assisted fixation. End points included radiographic parameters, lordosis distribution index (LDI), complications, pedicle screw accuracy, and inpatient metrics.

RESULTS

There were 17 patients with mean age of 60.5 years. Eight patients underwent interbody fusion at L5-S1, five patients at L4-S1, two patients at L3-S1, and one patient at L2-S1 in single lateral position. Operative times for 1-level and 2-level cases were 193 min and 278 min, respectively. Mean EBL was 71 cc. Mean improvements in L5-S1 segmental lordosis were 11.7 ± 4.0°, L1-S1 lordosis of 4.8 ± 6.4°, sagittal vertical axis of - 0.1 ± 1.7 cm°, pelvic tilt of - 3.1 ± 5.9°, and pelvic incidence lumbar-lordosis mismatch of - 4.6 ± 6.4°. Six patients corrected into a normal LDI (50-80%) and no patients became imbalanced over a mean follow-up period of 14.4 months. Of 100 screws placed in lateral position with robotic assistance, there were three total breaches (two lateral grade 3, one medial grade 2) for a screw accuracy of 97.0%. There were no neurologic, vascular, bowel, or ureteral injuries, and no implant failure or reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Single position lateral ALIF at L5-S1 with simultaneous robotic placement of pedicle screws by a second surgeon is a safe and effective technique that improves global alignment and lordosis distribution index.

Opportunities and challenges for robotic-assisted spine surgery: feasible indications for the MAZOR™ X Stealth Edition

The clinical use of new technologies has several potential benefits including improved accuracy, precision and efficiency. Robotic assistance during surgery is one such technology and it is making its way into neurosurgical operating rooms with increasing frequency. The Mazor X™ Stealth robot was first used in Canada for spine surgery during July 2022 and since then multiple indications for its use have been identified and evaluated.The outcomes of robot-assisted spine surgery have been promising but there is a lack of supportive studies which would serve to refine indications, establish protocols and disseminate practical information. To begin filling this gap we gathered a list of use-cases for which this new technology was successfully employed. In combination with cases that took place in our Centre, we reviewed the existing reported uses of the Mazor X™ Stealth for spine surgery and recorded their respective procedures and outcomes for patients and surgeons.Through this review we identified common uses of the Mazor X™ Stealth for spine surgery. Usage of robotic-assisted technology had a net positive impact on outcomes for patients as well as surgeons (e.g., improved accuracy of pedicle screw placement and reduced radiation burden). This curation remains a dynamic list, and we foresee the addition of more indications in the future.Clinical Relevance- Enabling the use of technology including robotic systems has the potential to attract clinical research expertise, reduce resource usage and to improve surgical outcomes.

Single-Position Lateral Approach for Revision Thoracolumbar Corpectomy With Delayed Ipsilateral Kidney Atrophy: Technical Note and Discussion of Complications

Improvements in navigation technology have enabled surgeons to safely offer single-position fusion surgeries, demonstrating shorter operating times and reduced length of stay (LOS) as compared to traditional lateral and prone dual-position surgeries. However, no studies to date describe revision thoracolumbar corpectomy with simultaneous posterior rod removal and replacement in the lateral position. Furthermore, this is the first reported complication of delayed ipsilateral kidney atrophy following lateral lumbar surgery. A 56-year-old male patient with history of metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma and complex surgical history for a prior T12 pathologic fracture presented to the clinic for follow-up. Computed tomography (CT) demonstrated bilateral broken rods and subsidence of the T12 interbody cage, for which he underwent revision T12 corpectomy and posterior instrumentation revision via a single-position, left-sided lateral approach. Simultaneous exposure and removal of the broken rods enabled the placement of two short temporary rods between the T11-L1 screws posteriorly, allowing for rod distraction and the placement of the expandable corpectomy cage into the appropriate position. On follow-up cancer surveillance imaging, the left kidney became progressively atrophic within six months after surgery. According to a review of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases, we describe the first reported case of a single-position thoracolumbar revision corpectomy with simultaneous rod replacement. Of particular importance in this technique is the use of temporary rod placement for distraction across the index level to facilitate interbody cage placement. Furthermore, we discussed the first reported complication of delayed ipsilateral kidney atrophy following lateral lumbar fusion.

Simultaneous Anterior Posterior Approach for Single-Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Robotic Assistance: Technical Guidelines and Early Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Lumbar lateral interbody fusion (LLIF) is traditionally performed in 2 stages: placing the interbody cage in the lateral decubitus position, then placing the percutaneous pedicle screw in the prone position. Performing interbody fusion and posterior fixation simultaneously could improve operative efficiency and clinical outcomes associated with longer operative times. We describe the operative steps and report clinical and radiographic outcomes associated with a simultaneous anterior and posterior approach (SAPA) for LLIF.

METHODS

Patients who underwent SAPA LLIF performed by a single surgeon over 1 year were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic data were analyzed, an operative guideline was created, and a learning curve was constructed using operative times.

RESULTS

SAPA LLIF was performed in 11 patients. Three patients experienced transient postoperative femoral nerve plexopathy with symptoms of ipsilateral hip flexion weakness and/or anterior thigh numbness; there were no other complications in the cohort. Radiographically, patients achieved significant increases in disc height (8.3 mm vs. 13.5 mm, P = 0.002) and foraminal height (20.2 mm vs. 25.3 mm, P = 0.0001). Patients showed significant improvements in Oswestry Disability Index (52 vs. 27.8, P = 0.002) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (32.6 vs. 39, P = 0.048) and Pain Interference (64.9 vs. 59.6, P = 0.001) at 3 months. A downward trend in operative time was observed for 1-level SAPA LLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

SAPA LLIF is a safe approach for LLIF that results in favorable clinical outcomes. This technique can potentially improve operative efficiency further along the course of a surgeon's learning curve.

Setting for single position surgery: survey from expert spinal surgeons

PURPOSE

To describe a comprehensive setting of the different alternatives for performing a single position fusion surgery based on the opinion of leading surgeons in the field.

METHODS

Between April and May of 2021, a specifically designed two round survey was distributed by mail to a group of leaders in the field of Single Position Surgery (SPS). The questionnaire included a variety of domains which were focused on highlighting tips and recommendations regarding improving the efficiency of the performance of SPS. This includes operation room setting, positioning, use of technology, approach, retractors specific details, intraoperative neuromonitoring and tips for inserting percutaneous pedicle screws in the lateral position. It asked questions focused on Lateral Single Position Surgery (LSPS), Lateral ALIF (LA) and Prone Lateral Surgery (PLS). Strong agreement was defined as an agreement of more than 80% of surgeons for each specific question. The number of surgeries performed in SPS by each surgeon was used as an indirect element to aid in exhibiting the expertise of the surgeons being surveyed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four surgeons completed both rounds of the questionnaire. Moderate or strong agreement was found for more than 50% of the items. A definition for Single Position Surgery and a step-by-step recommendation workflow was built to create a better understanding of surgeons who are starting the learning curve in this technique.

CONCLUSION

A recommendation of the setting for performing single position fusion surgery procedure (LSPS, LA and PLS) was developed based on a survey of leaders in the field.

Ninety-day complication, revision, and readmission rates for current-generation robot-assisted thoracolumbar spinal fusion surgery: results of a multicenter case series

OBJECTIVE

Robotics is a major area for research and development in spine surgery. The high accuracy of robot-assisted placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws is documented in the literature. The authors present the largest case series to date evaluating 90-day complication, revision, and readmission rates for robot-assisted spine surgery using the current generation of robotic guidance systems.

METHODS

An analysis of a retrospective, multicenter database of open and minimally invasive thoracolumbar instrumented fusion surgeries using the Mazor X or Mazor X Stealth Edition robotic guidance systems was performed. Patients 18 years of age or older and undergoing primary or revision surgery for degenerative spinal conditions were included. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate rates of malpositioned screws requiring revision, as well as overall complication, revision, and readmission rates within 90 days.

RESULTS

In total, 799 surgical cases (Mazor X: 48.81%; Mazor X Stealth Edition: 51.19%) were evaluated, involving robot-assisted placement of 4838 pedicle screws. The overall intraoperative complication rate was 3.13%. No intraoperative implant-related complications were encountered. Postoperatively, 129 patients suffered a total of 146 complications by 90 days, representing an incidence of 16.1%. The rate of an unrecognized malpositioned screw resulting in a new postoperative radiculopathy requiring revision surgery was 0.63% (5 cases). Medical and pain-related complications unrelated to hardware placement accounted for the bulk of postoperative complications within 90 days. The overall surgical revision rate at 90 days was 6.63% with 7 implant-related revisions, representing an implant-related revision rate of 0.88%. The 90-day readmission rate was 7.13% with 2 implant-related readmissions, representing an implant-related readmission rate of 0.25% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this multicenter case series and literature review suggest current-generation robotic guidance systems are associated with low rates of intraoperative and postoperative implant-related complications, revisions, and readmissions at 90 days. Future outcomes-based studies are necessary to evaluate complication, revision, and readmission rates compared to conventional surgery.