We have located links that may give you full text access.
Robotic Spine Surgery: Systematic Review of Common Error Types and Best Practices.
Operative Neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.) 2024 July 22
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Robotic systems have emerged as a significant advancement in the field of spine surgery. They offer improved accuracy in pedicle screw placement and reduce intraoperative complications, hospital length of stay, blood loss, and radiation exposure. As the use of robotics in spine surgery continues to grow, it becomes imperative to understand common errors and challenges associated with this new and promising technology. Although the reported accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is very high, the current literature does not capture near misses or incidental procedural errors that might have been managed during surgery or did not alter treatment of patients. We evaluated errors that occur during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion and identify best practices to minimize their occurrence.
METHODS: In this systematic review, we characterized 3 types of errors encountered during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion-registration errors, skiving, and interference errors-that have been reported in the literature.
RESULTS: Our search yielded 13 relevant studies reporting robot-assisted screw errors. Nine studies reported registration errors, with 60% of failed screws in those studies caused by registration issues. Seven studies highlighted skiving errors; 26.8% of the failed screws in those studies were caused by skiving. Finally, interference errors were reported in 4 studies, making up 19.5% of failed screws.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of these findings, we suggest best practices-including close attention to preoperative planning, patient positioning, image registration, and equipment selection-to minimize the occurrence of these errors. Awareness of how errors occur may increase the safety of this technology.
METHODS: In this systematic review, we characterized 3 types of errors encountered during robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion-registration errors, skiving, and interference errors-that have been reported in the literature.
RESULTS: Our search yielded 13 relevant studies reporting robot-assisted screw errors. Nine studies reported registration errors, with 60% of failed screws in those studies caused by registration issues. Seven studies highlighted skiving errors; 26.8% of the failed screws in those studies were caused by skiving. Finally, interference errors were reported in 4 studies, making up 19.5% of failed screws.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of these findings, we suggest best practices-including close attention to preoperative planning, patient positioning, image registration, and equipment selection-to minimize the occurrence of these errors. Awareness of how errors occur may increase the safety of this technology.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Guidelines for administering gadolinium-based contrast agents to patients with renal dysfunction (Version 3: Revised May 20th, 2024).Clinical and Experimental Nephrology 2025 January 3
Sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock: controversies and evidence gaps in diagnosis and management.Journal of Intensive Care 2025 January 2
The diverse effects of ketamine, a jack-of-all-trades: a narrative review.British Journal of Anaesthesia 2025 January 2
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 © 1994-2025 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