We have located links that may give you full text access.
Accuracy Evaluation of a Novel Spinal Robotic System for Autonomous Laminectomy in Thoracic and Lumbar Vertebrae: A Cadaveric Study.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 2023 March 22
BACKGROUND: The main function of robots in spine surgery is to assist with pedicle screw placement. Laminectomy, which is as important as pedicle screw placement, lacks a mature robot-assisted system. The aims of this study were to introduce the first autonomous laminectomy robot, to explore the feasibility of autonomous robotic laminectomy, and to validate its accuracy using a cadaveric model.
METHODS: Forty vertebrae from 4 cadavers were included in the study; 7 thoracic and 3 lumbar vertebrae were randomly selected in each cadaver. The surgeon was able to plan the laminectomy path based on computed tomographic (CT) data before the surgical procedure. The robot performed the laminectomy autonomously, and a postoperative CT scan was made. The deviation of each cutting plane from the plan was quantitatively analyzed, and the accuracy and safety were qualitatively evaluated. The time required for the laminectomy was also recorded.
RESULTS: Cuts were performed in 80 laminectomy planes (56 for thoracic vertebrae and 24 for lumbar vertebrae). The mean time for 1-sided laminectomy was 333.59 ± 116.49 seconds, which was shorter for thoracic vertebrae (284.41 ± 66.04 seconds) than lumbar vertebrae (448.33 ± 128.65 seconds) (p < 0.001). The mean time for single-level total laminectomy was 814.05 ± 302.23 seconds, which was also shorter for thoracic vertebrae (690.46 ± 165.74 seconds) than lumbar vertebrae (1,102.42 ± 356.13 seconds) (p = 0.002). The mean deviation of the cutting plane from the plan was 0.67 ± 0.30 mm for the most superior cutting point and 0.73 ± 0.31 mm for the most inferior point. There were no significant differences in the deviation between thoracic vertebrae (0.66 ± 0.26 mm) and lumbar vertebrae (0.67 ± 0.38 mm) at the superior cutting point (p = 0.908) and between thoracic vertebrae (0.72 ± 0.30 mm) and lumbar vertebrae (0.73 ± 0.33 mm) at the inferior cutting point (p = 0.923). In the qualitative analysis of the accuracy of the 80 laminectomy planes, 66 (83%) were classified as grade A, 14 (18%) were grade B, and none was grade C. In the safety analysis, 65 planes (81%) were considered safe and the safety of the other 15 planes (19%) was considered uncertain.
CONCLUSIONS: The results confirmed the accuracy of this robotic system, supporting its use for laminectomy of thoracolumbar vertebrae.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
METHODS: Forty vertebrae from 4 cadavers were included in the study; 7 thoracic and 3 lumbar vertebrae were randomly selected in each cadaver. The surgeon was able to plan the laminectomy path based on computed tomographic (CT) data before the surgical procedure. The robot performed the laminectomy autonomously, and a postoperative CT scan was made. The deviation of each cutting plane from the plan was quantitatively analyzed, and the accuracy and safety were qualitatively evaluated. The time required for the laminectomy was also recorded.
RESULTS: Cuts were performed in 80 laminectomy planes (56 for thoracic vertebrae and 24 for lumbar vertebrae). The mean time for 1-sided laminectomy was 333.59 ± 116.49 seconds, which was shorter for thoracic vertebrae (284.41 ± 66.04 seconds) than lumbar vertebrae (448.33 ± 128.65 seconds) (p < 0.001). The mean time for single-level total laminectomy was 814.05 ± 302.23 seconds, which was also shorter for thoracic vertebrae (690.46 ± 165.74 seconds) than lumbar vertebrae (1,102.42 ± 356.13 seconds) (p = 0.002). The mean deviation of the cutting plane from the plan was 0.67 ± 0.30 mm for the most superior cutting point and 0.73 ± 0.31 mm for the most inferior point. There were no significant differences in the deviation between thoracic vertebrae (0.66 ± 0.26 mm) and lumbar vertebrae (0.67 ± 0.38 mm) at the superior cutting point (p = 0.908) and between thoracic vertebrae (0.72 ± 0.30 mm) and lumbar vertebrae (0.73 ± 0.33 mm) at the inferior cutting point (p = 0.923). In the qualitative analysis of the accuracy of the 80 laminectomy planes, 66 (83%) were classified as grade A, 14 (18%) were grade B, and none was grade C. In the safety analysis, 65 planes (81%) were considered safe and the safety of the other 15 planes (19%) was considered uncertain.
CONCLUSIONS: The results confirmed the accuracy of this robotic system, supporting its use for laminectomy of thoracolumbar vertebrae.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app