Evaluation of K-wireless robotic and navigation assisted pedicle screw placement in adult degenerative spinal surgery: learning curve and technical notes

Proficiency Development and Learning Curve in Robot-Assisted Spine Surgery Using the ExcelsiusGPS® System: Experience From a Single Institution

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort Study Objectives: Robot-assisted spine surgery (RASS) is a rapidly evolving technique with potential benefits for improving surgical outcomes. A number of studies on RASS learning curve have focused on early iterations of the Mazor robot. Limited research exists on the learning curve associated with using the Globus Medical ExcelsiusGPS® system. In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the learning curve of RASS using the ExcelsiusGPS® system at a single institution.

METHODS

A total of 95 patients (541 screws) who underwent RASS between 2021 and 2022 were included. Variables including operative time, robot registration time, screw placement time, fluoroscopy utilization, and complications were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and two-sample t-tests.

RESULTS

The average operative time significantly decreased after the first 14 cases, indicating a learning curve. However, no significant improvement was observed in robot registration time. Notably, screw placement time significantly improved after approximately 13 cases. When controlling for the number of levels fused, the trends remained consistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed the presence of a learning curve in RASS using the ExcelsiusGPS® system and demonstrated rapid proficiency development. Our findings highlight the relatively quick learning curve of 1 RASS system.

Assessing intraoperative pedicle screw placement accuracy using biplanar radiographs compared to three-dimensional imaging

To date, biplanar imaging (2D) has been the method of choice for pedicle screw (PS) positioning and verified for the anteroposterior view and (spinal midline) M-line method. In recent years, the use of intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging has become available with the Gertzbein-Robbins system (GRS) to assess PS breach and positioning confirmation. The aim is to determine if 2D imaging is sufficient to assess PS position in comparison to advanced 3D imaging.Retrospective review of prospectively collected data from 204 consecutive adult patients who underwent posterior thoracic and lumbar instrumented fusion for degenerative spinal surgery by a single surgeon (2019-2022).Of the 204 patients, 187 (91.6%) had intraoperative images available for analysis. A total of 1044 PS implants were used; 922 (88.3%) were robotically placed. Postoperative CT scans were verified with M-line/GRS findings. Among 103 patients (50.5%) with a total of 362 screws, (34.7%) had postoperative CT, intraoperative 3D scan, and intraoperative 2D scan for analysis. Postoperative CT findings were consistent with all GRS findings, validating that 3D imaging was accurate. Screws (1%) were falsely verified by the M-line as 3D imaging confirmed false negative or positive findings.In our series, intraoperative 3D scan was as accurate as postoperative CT scan in assessing PS breach. A significant number of PS may be falsely read as accurate on 2D imaging, that is in fact inaccurate when assessed on 3D imaging. An intraoperative post-instrumentation 3D scan may be preferable to prevent postoperative recognition of a falsely verified screw on biplanar imaging.

Learning curves for robotic-assisted spine surgery: an analysis of the time taken for screw insertion, robot setting, registration, and fluoroscopy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to clarify the learning curve for robotic-assisted spine surgery. We analyzed the workflow in robotic-assisted spine surgery and investigated how much experience is required to become proficient in robotic-assisted spine surgery.

METHODS

The data were obtained from consecutive 125 patients who underwent robotic-assisted screw placement soon after introducing a spine robotic system at a single center from April 2021 to January 2023. The 125 cases were divided into phases 1-5 of sequential groups of 25 cases each and compared for screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, intraoperative blood loss, number of fused segments, operation time, or operation time per segment between the 5 phases. There were significant differences in screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time between the 5 phases. The screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time in phase 1 were significantly longer than those in phases 2, 3, 4, and 5.

CONCLUSION

In an analysis of 125 cases after the introduction of the spine robotic system, the screw insertion time, robot setting time, registration time, and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the 25 cases in the period initially after introduction. The times were not significantly different in the subsequent 100 cases. Surgeons can be proficient in robotic-assisted spine surgery after their experience with 25 cases.

Learning curve of junior surgeons in robot-assisted pedicle screw placement: a comparative cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Robot-assisted technology has been gradually applied to pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery. This study was designed to detailedly evaluate the learning curve of junior surgeons in robot-assisted spine surgery.

METHODS

From December 2020 to February 2022, 199 patients requiring surgical treatment with posterior pedicle screw fixation were prospectively recruited into the study. The patients were randomized to the robot-assisted group (the RA group) or the conventional freehand group (the CF group). Under the senior specialist's supervision, pedicle screws were placed by two junior fellows without prior experience. Cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis was performed on the learning curve of pedicle screw placement for performing quantitative assessment based on the time of screw insertion.

RESULTS

In total, 769 and 788 pedicle screws were placed in the RA and CF groups. Compared with the CF group, the learning duration in the RA group was shorter in the upper thoracic region (57 vs. 70 screws), but longer in the lower thoracic (62 vs. 58 screws) and the lumbosacral region (56 vs. 48 screws). The slope of learning curve was lower in the RA group than in the CF group. The screw accuracy in the RA group was superior to that in the CF group, especially in upper thoracic region (89.4% vs. 76.7%, P < 0.001). This disparity of accuracy became wider in deformity cases. In the upper thoracic region, the mean placement time was 5.34 ± 1.96 min in the RA group and 5.52 ± 2.43 min in the CF groups, while in the lower thoracic and lumbosacral regions, the CF group's mean placement times were statistically shorter. Three screw-related neural complications occurred in the CF group.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted technique has its advantages in the upper thoracic region and deformity cases, which is easier and safer to insert pedicle screws. The robot-assisted technique allowed a short learning curve for junior surgeons and exhibited consistently excellent results even in the early application period.

A Single-Center Experience of Robotic-Assisted Spine Surgery in Korea : Analysis of Screw Accuracy, Potential Risk Factor of Screw Malposition and Learning Curve

OBJECTIVE

Recently, robotic-assisted spine surgery (RASS) has been considered a minimally invasive and relatively accurate method. In total, 495 robotic-assisted pedicle screw fixation (RAPSF) procedures were attempted on 100 patients during a 14-month period. The current study aimed to analyze the accuracy, potential risk factors, and learning curve of RAPSF.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the position of RAPSF using the Gertzbein and Robbins scale (GRS). The accuracy was analyzed using the ratio of the clinically acceptable group (GRS grades A and B), the dissatisfying group (GRS grades C, D, and E), and the Surgical Evaluation Assistant program. The RAPSF was divided into the no-breached group (GRS grade A) and breached group (GRS grades B, C, D, and E), and the potential risk factors of RAPSF were evaluated. The learning curve was analyzed by changes in robot-used time per screw and the occurrence tendency of breached and failed screws according to case accumulation.

RESULTS

The clinically acceptable group in RAPSF was 98.12%. In the analysis using the Surgical Evaluation Assistant program, the tip offset was 2.37±1.89 mm, the tail offset was 3.09±1.90 mm, and the angular offset was 3.72°±2.72°. In the analysis of potential risk factors, the difference in screw fixation level (p=0.009) and segmental distance between the tracker and the instrumented level (p=0.001) between the no-breached and breached group were statistically significant, but not for the other factors. The mean difference between the no-breach and breach groups was statistically significant in terms of pedicle width (p<0.001) and tail offset (p=0.042). In the learning curve analysis, the occurrence of breached and failed screws and the robot-used time per screw screws showed a significant decreasing trend.

CONCLUSION

In the current study, RAPSF was highly accurate and the specific potential risk factors were not identified. However, pedicle width was presumed to be related to breached screw. Meanwhile, the robot-used time per screw and the incidence of breached and failed screws decreased with the learning curve.

Prospective Comparison of Two Robotically Navigated Pedicle Screw Instrumentation Techniques

This study aimed to compare screw accuracy and incidence of skive between two robotically navigated instrumented techniques in posterior spine fusion surgery: manual anti-skive instrumentation with an anti-skive cannula (ASC) and the use of a navigated, high-speed drill (HSD). Over a 3-year period, consecutive patients are undergoing RNA posterior fusion surgery with either ASC (n = 53) or HSD (n = 63). Both groups met a value of approximately 292 screws in our analysis (296 ASC, 294 HSD), which was determined by a biostatistician at an academic institution. Screw accuracy and skive was analyzed using preoperative CT and intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) fluoroscopy. Among 590 planned robotically inserted pedicle screws (296 ASC, 294 HSD), 245 ASC screws (82.8%) and 283 HSD screws (96.3%) were successfully inserted (p < 0.05). Skive events occurred in 4/283 (1.4%) HSD screws and 15/245 (6.2%) ASC screws (p < 0.05). HSD screws showed better accuracy in the axial and sagittal planes, being closer to planned trajectories in all directions except cranial deviation (p < 0.05). Additionally, HSD had a significantly lower time per screw (1.9 ± 1.0 min) compared to ASC (3.2 ± 2.0 min, p < 0.001). No adverse clinical effects were observed. The HSD technique showed significant improvements in time and screw accuracy compared to ASC. Biplanar fluoroscopy and 3D imaging resulted in significantly lower radiation exposure and time compared to ASC. These significant findings in the HSD group may be attributed to the lower occurrence of malpositioned screws, leading to a decrease in the need for second authentication. This represents a notable iterative improvement of the RNA platform.

Spine Surgical Robotics: Current Status and Recent Clinical Applications

With the development of artificial intelligence and the further deepening of medical-engineering integration, spine surgical robot-assisted (RA) technique has made significant progress and its applicability in clinical practice is constantly expanding in recent years. In this review, we have systematically summarized the majority of literature related to spine surgical robots in the past decade, and not only classified robots accordingly, but also summarized the latest research progress in RA technique for screw placement such as cervical, thoracic, and lumbar pedicle screws, cortical bone trajectory screws, cervical lateral mass screws, and S2 sacroiliac screws; guiding targeted puncture and placement of endoscope via the intervertebral foramen; complete resection of spinal tumor tissue; and decompressive laminectomy. In addition, this report also provides a detailed evaluation of RA technique's advantages and disadvantages, and clarifies the accuracy, safety, and practicality of RA technique. We consider that this review can help clinical physicians further understand and familiarize the current clinical application status of spine surgical robots, thereby promoting the continuous improvement and popularization of RA technique, and ultimately benefiting numerous patients.

Robotic-navigated assistance in spine surgery

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, as well as intraoperative factors, radiation exposure, and complication rates in adult patients with degenerative disorders of the thoracic and lumbar spines who have undergone robotic-navigated spinal surgery using a contemporary system. The authors reviewed the prospectively collected data on 196 adult patients who had pedicle screws implanted with robot-navigated assistance (RNA) using the Mazor X Stealth system between June 2019 and March 2022. Pedicle screws were implanted by one experienced spinal surgeon after completion of a learning period. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was determined using intraoperative 3D fluoroscopy. A total of 1,123 pedicle screws were implanted: 1,001 screws (89%) were placed robotically, 63 (6%) were converted from robotic placement to a freehand technique, and 59 (5%) were planned to be implanted freehand. Of the robotically placed screws, 942 screws (94%) were determined to be Gertzbein and Robbins grade A with median deviation of 0.8 mm (interquartile range 0.4 to 1.6). Skive events were noted with 20 pedicle screws (1.8%). No adverse clinical sequelae were noted in the 90-day follow-up. The mean fluoroscopic exposure per screw was 4.9 seconds (SD 3.8). RNA is highly accurate and reliable, with a low rate of abandonment once mastered. No adverse clinical sequelae occurred after implanting a large series of pedicle screws using the latest generation of RNA. Understanding of patient-specific anatomical features and the real-time intraoperative identification of risk factors for suboptimal screw placement have the potential to improve accuracy further.

TiRobot-assisted percutaneous kyphoplasty in the management of multilevel (more than three levels) osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of TiRobot-assisted kyphoplasty with that of the traditional fluoroscopy-assisted approach in treating multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we collected data from 71 patients (TiRobot-assisted group, n = 39; fluoroscopy-assisted group, n = 32) with multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture treated with unilateral traditional TiRobot-assisted or fluoroscopy-assisted percutaneous kyphoplasty. The operative time, infusion volume, length of stay (LOS), hospital expenses, visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), radiation exposure, puncture deviation, anterior height of diseased vertebrae, local kyphotic angle, bone cement distribution, and bone cement leakage were compared between the TiRobot- and fluoroscopy-assisted groups.

RESULTS

Of the 257 treated vertebrae, the average amount of bone cement injected in the TiRobot-assisted (142 vertebrae) and fluoroscopy-assisted (115 vertebrae) groups was 4.6 mL and 4.5 mL, respectively. The VAS score was significantly lower in the TiRobot-assisted group at 24 hours post-operatively (p = 0.006). The X-ray frequency was 34.7 times in the TiRobot-assisted group and 51.7 times in the fluoroscopy-assisted group (p < 0.001). In addition to the operative time, cumulative radiation dose for the surgeon and patient was significantly lower in the TiRobot-assisted group. The hospital expenses of the TiRobot-assisted group were significantly higher (p < 0.001). The puncture deviation and bone cement distribution were better in the TiRobot-assisted group (p < 0.001). Bone cement leakage was found in 18 and 29 cases in the TiRobot- and fluoroscopy-assisted groups, respectively (p = 0.010). One patient in the fluoroscopy-assisted group experienced radiculopathy due to a misplaced puncture but recovered in three months. No radiculopathy was observed in the TiRobot-assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

TiRobot-assisted percutaneous multilevel kyphoplasty is more accurate and has smaller radiometry, a more uniform bone cement distribution, and lower bone cement leakage. This method was therefore accurate and safe.

Robotics in spine surgery: systematic review of literature

PURPOSE

Over 4.83 million spine surgery procedures are performed annually around the world. With the considerable caseload and the precision needed to achieve optimal spinal instrumentation, technical progress has helped to improve the technique's safety and accuracy with the development of peri-operative assistance tools. Contrary to other surgical applications already part of the standard of care, the development of robotics in spine surgery is still a novelty and is not widely available nor used. Robotics, especially when coupled with other guidance modalities such as navigation, seems to be a promising tool in our quest for accuracy, improving patient outcomes and reducing surgical complications. Robotics in spine surgery may also be for the surgeon a way to progress in terms of ergonomics, but also to respond to a growing concern among surgical teams to reduce radiation exposure.

METHOD

We present in this recent systematic review of the literature realized according to the PRISMA guidelines the place of robotics in spine surgery, reviewing the comparison to standard techniques, the current and future indications, the learning curve, the impact on radiation exposure, and the cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Seventy-six relevant original studies were identified and analyzed for the review.

CONCLUSION

Robotics has proved to be a safe help for spine surgery, both for the patient with a decrease of operating time and increase in pedicular screw accuracy, and for the surgical team with a decrease of radiation exposure. Medico-economic studies demonstrated that despite a high buying cost, the purchase of a robot dedicated for spine surgery is cost-effective resulting in lesser revision, lower infection, reduced length of stay, and shorter surgical procedure.

Augmented reality for minimally invasive spinal surgery

Background

Augmented reality (AR) is an emerging technology that can overlay computer graphics onto the real world and enhance visual feedback from information systems. Within the past several decades, innovations related to AR have been integrated into our daily lives; however, its application in medicine, specifically in minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS), may be most important to understand. AR navigation provides auditory and haptic feedback, which can further enhance surgeons' capabilities and improve safety.

Purpose

The purpose of this article is to address previous and current applications of AR, AR in MISS, limitations of today's technology, and future areas of innovation.

Methods

A literature review related to applications of AR technology in previous and current generations was conducted.

Results

AR systems have been implemented for treatments related to spinal surgeries in recent years, and AR may be an alternative to current approaches such as traditional navigation, robotically assisted navigation, fluoroscopic guidance, and free hand. As AR is capable of projecting patient anatomy directly on the surgical field, it can eliminate concern for surgeon attention shift from the surgical field to navigated remote screens, line-of-sight interruption, and cumulative radiation exposure as the demand for MISS increases.

Conclusion

AR is a novel technology that can improve spinal surgery, and limitations will likely have a great impact on future technology.

Sacroiliac joint fusion navigation: how accurate is pin placement?

OBJECTIVE

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion utilizing intraoperative navigation requires a standard reference frame, which is often placed using a percutaneous pin. Proper placement ensures the correct positioning of SIJ fusion implants. There is currently no grading scheme for evaluation of pin placement into the pelvis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of ideal percutaneous pin placement into the posterior ilium during navigated SIJ fusion.

METHODS

After IRB approval was obtained, electronic medical records and intraoperative computed tomography images of patients who underwent navigated SIJ fusion by the senior author between October 2013 and January 2020 were reviewed. A pin placement grading scheme and the definition of "ideal" placement were developed by the authors and deemed acceptable by fellow attending surgeons. Six attending surgeons completed two rounds of pin placement grading, and statistical analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Of 90 eligible patients, 73.3% had ideal pin placement, 17.8% medial/lateral breach, and 8.9% complete miss. Male patients were 3.7 times more likely to have ideal placement than females (p < 0.05). There was no relationship between BMI, SIJ fusion laterality, or pin placement laterality and ideal placement. Interobserver reliability was 0.72 and 0.70 in the first and second rounds, respectively, and defined as "substantial agreement." Intraobserver reliability ranged from 0.74 (substantial agreement) to 0.92 (almost perfect agreement).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonideal pin placement occurred in 26.7% of cases, but a true "miss" into the sacrum was rare. Ideal pin placement was more likely in males and was not associated with BMI, SIJ fusion laterality, or pin placement laterality. The grading scheme developed has high intraobserver and interobserver reliability, indicating that it is reproducible and can be used for future studies. When placing percutaneous pins, surgeons must be aware of factors that can decrease placement accuracy, regardless of location.

Learning curves in robotic neurosurgery: a systematic review

The transition to performing procedures robotically generally entails a period of adjustment known as a learning curve as the surgeon develops a familiarity with the technology. However, no study has comprehensively examined robotic learning curves across the field of neurosurgery. We conducted a systematic review to characterize the scope of literature on robotic learning curves in neurosurgery, assess operative parameters that may involve a learning curve, and delineate areas for future investigation. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched. Following deduplication, articles were screened by title and abstract for relevance. Remaining articles were screened via full text for final inclusion. Bibliographic and learning curve data were extracted. Of 746 resultant articles, 32 articles describing 3074 patients were included, of which 23 (71.9%) examined spine, 4 (12.5%) pediatric, 4 (12.5%) functional, and 1 (3.1%) general neurosurgery. The parameters assessed for learning curves were heterogeneous. In total, 8 (57.1%) of 14 studies found reduced operative time with increased cases, while the remainder demonstrated no learning curve. Six (60.0%) of 10 studies reported reduced operative time per component with increased cases, while the remainder indicated no learning curve. Radiation time, radiation time per component, robot time, registration time, setup time, and radiation dose were assessed by ≤ 4 studies each, with 0-66.7% of studies demonstrated a learning curve. Four (44.4%) of 9 studies on accuracy showed improvement over time, while the others indicated no improvement over time. The number of cases required to reverse the learning curve ranged from 3 to 75. Learning curves are common in robotic neurosurgery. However, existing studies demonstrate high heterogeneity in assessed parameters and the number of cases that comprise the learning curve. Future studies should seek to develop strategies to reduce the number of cases required to reach the learning curve.

Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement in Robot-Assisted Surgery: A Multicenter Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective multicenter.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to investigate the factors involved in, and their relative contributions to, the overall accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Robot-assisted surgery has reportedly resulted in greater accuracy for placement of pedicle screws than conventional methods. There are many potential factors affecting the accuracy of pedicle screws placed with a robot. No study has investigated these factors in a robust way.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiographic and clinical data of three centers were pooled. Preoperative and postoperative computerized tomographies were obtained by all three centers to assess the accuracy of the placed screws. The primary outcome measured was accuracy of pedicle screws placed with the robot. The authors performed a multivariate regression analysis to determine the significant patient-related and screw-related variables and their relative contribution to the overall accuracy. In addition, an ordinal regression analysis was conducted to investigate the effects of different variables on accuracy of robot-placed screws graded by Gertzbein-Robbins grading system (GRS).

RESULTS

The total contribution of all studied variables to overall accuracy variation as measured by offsets between the placed and planned screws was only 18%. Obesity, long constructs, female gender, surgeon, and vertebral levels were among the factors that had small contributions to the different screw offsets. For GRS grades, significant variables were gender (Log odds: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.38-0.85), age (Log odds: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.01-0.03), length of constructs (Log odds: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02-0.11), screw diameter (Log odds: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.39-0.71), and length of the screws (Log odds: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01-0.05). However, these variables too, regardless of their significant association with the accuracy of placed screws, had little contribution to overall variability of accuracy itself (only about 7%).

CONCLUSION

The accuracy of screws placed with robotic assistance, as graded by GRS or measured offsets between planned and placed screw trajectories, is minimally affected by different patient-related or screw-related variables due to the robustness of the robotic navigation system used in this study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

The Learning Curve of Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placements Using the Cumulative Sum Analysis: A Study of the First 50 Cases at a Single Center

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to clarify how many cases surgeons need to experience to pass the learning phase of robotic-assisted spine surgery using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted on the initial 50 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted pedicle screw placements with open procedures using a spine robotic system (Mazor X Stealth Edition) at a single center from April 2021 to January 2022. There were 19 male and 31 female patients with a mean age of 58.7 (range, 13-86) years. To split the surgeries into the early and late phases using the CUSUM analysis of screw insertion time, we compared the screw insertion time, the robot setting time, the registration time, and the operation time in the early and late phases.

Results

The screw insertion time, the robot setting time, and the registration time declined as the number of surgical cases increased. The operation time did not decline as the number of surgical cases increased. The learning curve for screw insertion time can be separated into two stages based on the CUSUM analysis. The first 23 cases were in the early phase, and the later 27 cases were in the late phase. The mean screw insertion time was reduced from 3.2 min in the first 23 cases to 2.7 min in the subsequent 27 cases. The robot setting time and registration time in the late phase were also significantly shorter than those in the early phase.

Conclusions

The screw insertion time, robot setting time, and registration time decreased with experience. After 23 cases, surgeons passed the learning phase of robotic-assisted spine surgery and became more proficient.

Screw Insertion Time, Fluoroscopy Time, and Operation Time for Robotic-Assisted Lumbar Pedicle Screw Placement Compared With Freehand Technique

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to clarify the superiority of robotic-assisted lumbar pedicle screw placement in terms of screw insertion time, fluoroscopy time, and operation time.

Methods

The subjects were 46 patients who underwent a posterior lumbar interbody fusion with an open procedure for lumbar degenerative disease from April 2021 to February 2022. The robot group contained 29 cases of screw insertion using a spine robotic system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland). The freehand group contained 17 cases of screw insertion with the freehand technique utilizing the conventional C-arm image guidance. The screw insertion time, fluoroscopy time, and operation time were compared between the robot and the freehand group.

Results

The screw insertion time did not differ significantly between the two groups (robot group: 179.0 ± 65.2 sec; freehand group: 164.2 ± 83.4 sec; p = 0.507). The fluoroscopy time was significantly shorter in the robot group (robot group: 28.3 ± 25.8 sec; freehand group: 67.5 ± 72.8 sec; p = 0.011). The fluoroscopy time per segment was also significantly shorter in the robot group (robot group: 17.8 ± 23.0 sec; freehand group: 60.2 ± 74.8 sec; p = 0.007). The operation time was significantly longer in the robot group (robot group: 249.6 ± 72.5 min; freehand group: 195.8 ± 60.1 sec; p = 0.013), but the operation time per segment did not differ significantly between the two groups (robot group: 144.1 ± 39.0 min; freehand group: 159.7 ± 34.4 min; p = 0.477).

Conclusions

The screw insertion time and operation time per segment were similar when employing the spine robotic system compared to the freehand technique; however, the fluoroscopy time was shorter. The fluoroscopy time per segment in the robot group was 29.6% of the time of the freehand group using the C-arm. The surgeon's radiation exposure is thought to be decreased since the spine robotic system shortens the fluoroscopy time.

Learning curves in robot-assisted spine surgery: a systematic review and proposal of application to residency curricula

OBJECTIVE

Spine robots have seen increased utilization over the past half decade with the introduction of multiple new systems. Market research expects this expansion to continue over the next half decade at an annual rate of 20%. However, because of the novelty of these devices, there is limited literature on their learning curves and how they should be integrated into residency curricula. With the present review, the authors aimed to address these two points.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published English-language literature on PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies describing the learning curve in spine robotics. Included articles described clinical results in patients using one of the following endpoints: operative time, screw placement time, fluoroscopy usage, and instrumentation accuracy. Systems examined included the Mazor series, the ExcelsiusGPS, and the TiRobot. Learning curves were reported in a qualitative synthesis, given as the mean improvement in the endpoint per case performed or screw placed where possible. All studies were level IV case series with a high risk of reporting bias.

RESULTS

Of 1579 unique articles, 97 underwent full-text review and 21 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria; 62 articles were excluded for not presenting primary data for one of the above-described endpoints. Of the 21 articles, 18 noted the presence of a learning curve in spine robots, which ranged from 3 to 30 cases or 15 to 62 screws. Only 12 articles performed regressions of one of the endpoints (most commonly operative time) as a function of screws placed or cases performed. Among these, increasing experience was associated with a 0.24- to 4.6-minute decrease in operative time per case performed. All but one series described the experience of attending surgeons, not residents.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies of learning curves with spine robots have found them to be present, with the most common threshold being 20 to 30 cases performed. Unfortunately, all available evidence is level IV data, limited to case series. Given the ability of residency to allow trainees to safely perform these cases under the supervision of experienced senior surgeons, it is argued that a curriculum should be developed for senior-level residents specializing in spine comprising a minimum of 30 performed cases.