Cervical Spine Pedicle Screw Accuracy in Fluoroscopic, Navigated and Template Guided Systems-A Systematic Review

Comparison of the S8 navigation system and the TINAVI orthopaedic robot in the treatment of upper cervical instability

The objective is to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the S8 navigation system and the Tinavi orthopaedic surgery robot in the treatment of upper cervical instability. The research methods adopted are as follows. The clinical data of patients with upper cervical instability who underwent surgery from May 2021 to December 2021 were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into a navigation group (assisted by the S8 navigation system) and a tinavi group (assisted by the Tinavi robot) according to the auxiliary system used. Computed tomography and digital radiography were performed after the operation. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was evaluated using the criteria put forward by Rampersaud. Degree of facet joint violation, visual analogue scale score, neck disability index and Japanese orthopaedic association score were recorded and assessed during follow-up examinations in both groups. Record two groups of surgery-related indicators. Record the complications of the two groups. A total of 50 patients were included. 21 patients in the navigation group and 29 in the tinavi group. The results of the study are as follows. The average follow-up time was 12.1 months. There was no significant difference in nail placement accuracy between the navigation and tinavi groups (P > 0.05); however, the navigation group had a significantly higher rate of facet joint violation than that of tinavi group (P < 0.05), and the screws were placed closer to the anterior cortex (P < 0.05). Significantly more intraoperative fluoroscopies were performed in the tinavi group than in the navigation group, and the operation time was significantly longer in the tinavi group than in the navigation group (P < 0.05). The time of single nail implantation, intraoperative blood loss and incision length in navigation group were significantly longer than those in tinavi group. There were no statistically significant differences in other indicators between the two groups (P > 0.05). We come to the following conclusion. The Stealth Station S8 navigation system (Medtronic, USA), which also uses an optical tracking system, and the Tinavi Orthopedic robot have shown the same high accuracy and satisfactory clinical results in the treatment of upper cervical instability. Although the S8 navigation system still has many limitations, it still has good application prospects and is a new tool for spine surgery.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Fluoroscopic-Guided Surgery on the Accuracy of Spine Pedicle Screw Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Spinal fusion is a common method by which surgeons decrease instability and deformity of the spinal segment targeted. Pedicle screws are vital tools in fusion surgeries and advancements in technology have introduced several modalities of screw placement. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in robot-assisted (RA) versus fluoroscopic-guided (FG) techniques. The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were systematically reviewed from January 2007 through to August 8, 2022, to identify relevant studies. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was determined using the Gertzbein-Robbins (GR) classification system. Facet joint violation (FJV), total case radiation dosage, total case radiation time, total operating room (OR) time, and total case blood loss were collected. Twenty-one articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Successful screw accuracy (GR Grade A or B) was found to be 1.02 (95% confidence interval: 1.01 - 1.04) times more likely with the RA technique. In defining accuracy solely based on the GR Grade A criteria, screws placed with RA were 1.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.06 - 1.15) times more likely to be accurate. There was no significant difference between the two techniques with respect to blood loss (Hedges' g: 1.16, 95% confidence interval: -0.75 to 3.06) or case radiation time (Hedges' g: -0.34, 95% CI: -1.22 to 0.53). FG techniques were associated with shorter operating room times (Hedges' g: -1.03, 95% confidence interval: -1.76 to -0.31), and higher case radiation dosage (Hedges' g: 1.61, 95% confidence interval: 1.11 to 2.10). This review suggests that RA may slightly increase pedicle screw accuracy and decrease per-case radiation dosage compared to FG techniques. However, total operating times for RA cases are greater than those for FG cases.

Safety and Accuracy of Robot-Assisted Cervical Screw Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy and safety of robot-assisted (RA) cervical screw placement with conventional freehand (FH) technique.

METHODS

Computer-based searches were conducted on various databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, the China Biology Medicine, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting the use of RA techniques for cervical screw placement and providing data on safety and accuracy outcomes. Primary outcome indicators focused on the accuracy of screw placement, while secondary outcome indicators included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication rate, and radiation dose. Data from eligible studies were extracted and synthesized using a forest plot analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 312 patients (1233 screws) from 6 studies were included, with 148 patients (47.4% with 567 screws) in the RA group. Perfect screw accuracy, as categorized by Gertzbein-Robbins grade A, was significantly superior with RA surgery compared to FH technique. RA screw implantation significantly reduced complication rates, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospitalization, and radiation dose compared to the conventional FH group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in surgery time between the RA and FH groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RA surgery significantly improves the accuracy of cervical screw insertion and offers potential advantages in terms of reduced complications and blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and decreased radiation exposure. However, the impact on operative time remains uncertain. Further high-quality studies, including large-scale randomized controlled trials, are needed to strengthen the evidence base.

Spinal robotics in cervical spine surgery: a systematic review with key concepts and technical considerations

OBJECTIVE

Spinal robotics for thoracolumbar procedures, predominantly employed for the insertion of pedicle screws, is currently an emerging topic in the literature. The use of robotics in instrumentation of the cervical spine has not been broadly explored. In this review, the authors aimed to coherently synthesize the existing literature of intraoperative robotic use in the cervical spine and explore considerations for future directions and developments in cervical spinal robotics.

METHODS

A literature search in the Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases was performed for the purpose of retrieving all articles reporting on cervical spine surgery with the use of robotics. For the purposes of this study, randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials, retrospective case series, and individual case reports were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was utilized to assess risk of bias of the studies included in the review. To present and synthesize results, data were extracted from the included articles and analyzed using the PyMARE library for effect-size meta-analysis.

RESULTS

On careful review, 6 articles published between 2016 and 2022 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including 1 randomized controlled trial, 1 nonrandomized controlled trial, 2 case series, and 2 case reports. These studies featured a total of 110 patients meeting the inclusion criteria (mean age 53.9 years, range 29-77 years; 64.5% males). A total of 482 cervical screws were placed with the use of a surgical robot, which yielded an average screw deviation of 0.95 mm. Cervical pedicle screws were the primary screw type used, at a rate of 78.6%. According to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, 97.7% of screws in this review achieved a clinically acceptable grade. The average duration of surgery, blood loss, and postoperative length of stay were all decreased in minimally invasive robotic surgery relative to open procedures. Only 1 (0.9%) postoperative complication was reported, which was a surgical site infection, and the mean length of follow-up was 2.7 months. No mortality was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted cervical screw placement is associated with acceptable rates of clinical grading, operative time, blood loss, and postoperative complications-all of which are equal to or improved relative to the metrics seen in the conventional use of fluoroscopy or computer-assisted navigation for cervical screw placement.