Robotic versus fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw insertion for metastatic spinal disease: a matched-cohort comparison

作者：Volodymyr Solomiichuk, Julius Fleischhammer, Granit Molliqaj, Jwad Warda, Awad Alaid, Kajetan von Eckardstein, Karl Schaller, Enrico Tessitore, Veit Rohde, Bawarjan Schatlo · 发表于：Neurosurgical FOCUS · 年份：2017 · DOI：10.3171/2017.3.focus1710 · 被引用次数：156 · 研究领域：Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques、Management of metastatic bone disease、Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

OBJECTIVE Robot-guided pedicle screw placement is an established technique for the placement of pedicle screws. However, most studies have focused on degenerative disease. In this paper, the authors focus on metastatic spinal disease, which is associated with osteolysis. The associated lack of dense bone may potentially affect the automatic recognition accuracy of radiography-based surgical assistance systems. The aim of the present study is to compare the accuracy of the SpineAssist robot system with conventional fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw placement for thoracolumbar metastatic spinal disease. METHODS Seventy patients with metastatic spinal disease who required instrumentation were included in this retrospective matched-cohort study. All 70 patients underwent surgery performed by the same team of experienced surgeons. The decision to use robot-assisted or fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw placement was based the availability of the robot system. In patients who underwent surgery with robot guidance, pedicle screws were inserted after preoperative planning and intraoperative fluoroscopic matching. In the "conventional" group, anatomical landmarks and anteroposterior and lateral fluoroscopy guided placement of the pedicle screws. The primary outcome measure was the accuracy of screw placement on the Gertzbein-Robbins scale. Grades A and B (< 2-mm pedicle breach) were considered clinically acceptable, and all other grades indicated misplacement. Secondary outcome measures ...