Cargando…

Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition

The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is unstable and remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for unsatisfactory Renaissance robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. This was a retrospective study of prospective data. From January 2017 to Ma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Jia Nan, Fan, Yong, Hao, Ding Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6395613/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30816334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40057-z
_version_ 1783399108971593728
author Zhang, Jia Nan
Fan, Yong
Hao, Ding Jun
author_facet Zhang, Jia Nan
Fan, Yong
Hao, Ding Jun
author_sort Zhang, Jia Nan
collection PubMed
description The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is unstable and remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for unsatisfactory Renaissance robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. This was a retrospective study of prospective data. From January 2017 to March 2018, 136 robot-assisted pedicle screw placements were performed in our department for spinal diseases, and a total of 874 screws were evaluated. All screws were assessed by the Gertzbein and Robbins classification. A and B were defined as satisfactory. C, D, and E were defined as unsatisfactory. Intraoperative registration failures due to nontechnical reasons or intraoperative adjustment were also defined as unsatisfactory. According to the evaluated results, the screws were divided into the satisfactory group (Group A) and the unsatisfactory group (Group B). The satisfactory rate was defined as satisfactory screws (the screws in Group A)/total screws, and the accurate rate was defined as accuracy screws (the screws in Group A)/the screws implanted by the robot (total screws - failed registration screws - screws adjusted during the operation). The age, sex, BMI, and BMD as well as the type of disease, the degree of vertebral rotation and the type of screw placement (percutaneous implantation or open implantation) were compared between the two groups, with the assessment of potential risk factors for unsatisfactory robot-assisted screw placement using logistic regression. A total of 874 screws were evaluated; there were 759 screws in Group A and 115 screws in Group B. The satisfactory rate was 86.8% (759/874), and the accuracy rate of the robot-placed screws was 94.4% (759/804). After logistic regression analysis, the independent risk factors were identified as obesity (OR 5.357 [95% CI 2.897–9.906], p < 0.01), osteoporosis, vertebral rotation and the presence of congenital scoliosis (OR 9.835 [95% CI 4.279–22.604], p < 0.01), particularly for severe osteoporosis (T < −3.5) and severe vertebral rotation (III-IV). According to the results of this study, obesity, osteoporosis and congenital scoliosis are risk factors for unsatisfactory robot-assisted screw placement. Furthermore, for surgeons in the initial stage of using a robot, we suggest avoiding cases in which a single risk factor or multiple risk factors exist to ensure the safety of the operation and to help augment the confidence of the surgeons.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6395613
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63956132019-03-04 Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition Zhang, Jia Nan Fan, Yong Hao, Ding Jun Sci Rep Article The accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is unstable and remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for unsatisfactory Renaissance robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. This was a retrospective study of prospective data. From January 2017 to March 2018, 136 robot-assisted pedicle screw placements were performed in our department for spinal diseases, and a total of 874 screws were evaluated. All screws were assessed by the Gertzbein and Robbins classification. A and B were defined as satisfactory. C, D, and E were defined as unsatisfactory. Intraoperative registration failures due to nontechnical reasons or intraoperative adjustment were also defined as unsatisfactory. According to the evaluated results, the screws were divided into the satisfactory group (Group A) and the unsatisfactory group (Group B). The satisfactory rate was defined as satisfactory screws (the screws in Group A)/total screws, and the accurate rate was defined as accuracy screws (the screws in Group A)/the screws implanted by the robot (total screws - failed registration screws - screws adjusted during the operation). The age, sex, BMI, and BMD as well as the type of disease, the degree of vertebral rotation and the type of screw placement (percutaneous implantation or open implantation) were compared between the two groups, with the assessment of potential risk factors for unsatisfactory robot-assisted screw placement using logistic regression. A total of 874 screws were evaluated; there were 759 screws in Group A and 115 screws in Group B. The satisfactory rate was 86.8% (759/874), and the accuracy rate of the robot-placed screws was 94.4% (759/804). After logistic regression analysis, the independent risk factors were identified as obesity (OR 5.357 [95% CI 2.897–9.906], p < 0.01), osteoporosis, vertebral rotation and the presence of congenital scoliosis (OR 9.835 [95% CI 4.279–22.604], p < 0.01), particularly for severe osteoporosis (T < −3.5) and severe vertebral rotation (III-IV). According to the results of this study, obesity, osteoporosis and congenital scoliosis are risk factors for unsatisfactory robot-assisted screw placement. Furthermore, for surgeons in the initial stage of using a robot, we suggest avoiding cases in which a single risk factor or multiple risk factors exist to ensure the safety of the operation and to help augment the confidence of the surgeons. Nature Publishing Group UK 2019-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6395613/ /pubmed/30816334 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40057-z Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Zhang, Jia Nan
Fan, Yong
Hao, Ding Jun
Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
title Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
title_full Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
title_fullStr Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
title_full_unstemmed Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
title_short Risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
title_sort risk factors for robot-assisted spinal pedicle screw malposition
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6395613/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30816334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40057-z
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangjianan riskfactorsforrobotassistedspinalpediclescrewmalposition
AT fanyong riskfactorsforrobotassistedspinalpediclescrewmalposition
AT haodingjun riskfactorsforrobotassistedspinalpediclescrewmalposition