gms | German Medical Science

67. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC)
Joint Meeting mit der Koreanischen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (KNS)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC) e. V.

12. - 15. Juni 2016, Frankfurt am Main

Robot-assisted spine surgery for instrumentation in traumatic spine injuries: A comparative study of pedicle screw accuracy

Meeting Abstract

  • Awad Alaid - Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Germany
  • Volodymyr Solomiichuk - Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Germany
  • Kajetan von Eckardstein - Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Germany
  • Veit Rohde - Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Germany
  • Bawarjan Schatlo - Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Germany

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie. 67. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC), 1. Joint Meeting mit der Koreanischen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (KNS). Frankfurt am Main, 12.-15.06.2016. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2016. DocDI.04.06

doi: 10.3205/16dgnc115, urn:nbn:de:0183-16dgnc1158

Veröffentlicht: 8. Juni 2016

© 2016 Alaid et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung). Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Gliederung

Text

Objective: Studies validating robotic technology in the spine have so far mainly focused on degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Traumatic instability may be associated with a motion of vertebral elements relative to each other which in turn may lead to a decreased accuracy of a spinous process clamp attached to the dorsal elements. The aim of the present study is therefore to compare the accuracy and utility of a robotic-assistance system to conventional fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw placement for traumatic spinal fractures.

Method: Forty (n=40) patients suffering from traumatic spinal fracture and requiring instrumentation were included in the study, with n=20 patients undergoing instrumentation with robotic assistance and n=20 patients using conventional technique. Robot-guidance (Mazor SpineAssist/Renaissance) was based on preoperative planning and intraoperative fluoroscopic matching. In the “conventional” group, pedicle screws were placed based on anatomical landmarks and anterior-posterior and lateral fluoroscopy. The primary outcome measure was accuracy of screw placement as assessed using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale. Screw grades A and B (less than 2mm pedicle breach) on postoperative coronal, sagittal and axial CT imaging were regarded as clinically acceptable, while all other grades were counted as misplacements.

Results: A total of 234 screws were placed on 117 levels. The upper thoracic spine (Th1-Th6) accounted for 18 operated levels (15%), the lower thoracic spine for 51 (43%) while the remaining 48 (42%) were lumbosacral. In the robot group (n=20, 108 screws), trajectories were graded A or B in 86 (79.6%) of screws. The misplacement rate was 20.4% (22/108 screws). In the conventional group (n=20, 126 screws), acceptable trajectories made up 73.8% of screws (93/126) with a misplacement rate of 26.2% (33/126). There was no difference in screw accuracy between groups (Chi2, 2-tailed Fisher´s exact, p=0.35). One screw misplacement in the open group required a revision surgery (5%), but none were required in the robot group.

Conclusions: Pedicle screw placement for traumatic spinal fractures of the thoracolumbar spine can be performed effectively and safely using robot-guided assistance, but accuracy rates and direction of deviation are similar to conventional technique.