Observational analysis shows 99% screw accuracy and 89.5% fusion rates in a Spanish cohort, indicating low complications.
Background/Objectives: Screw placement accuracy with robotic guidance shows better results than freehand techniques, yet there is scant data for region-specific outcomes, fusion rates, and complication profiles in different populations. The purpose of this study is to assess and describe screw-rod accuracy, fusion rates, and complications of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in a Spanish cohort. Methods: Robotic-guided technique for thoracolumbar fusion in 115 patients (July 2020–January 2025) using ExcelsiusGPS® platform (Globus Medical Inc., Audubon, PA, USA). Inclusion criteria: adults (≥18 years) with postoperative CT to assess accuracy. Primary outcomes were screw accuracy (assessed on the Gertzbein–Robbins scale), fusion rates, and complications (infection, osteolysis, and subsidence). Jamovi 2.6 was employed for statistical analysis. Results: Of a total of 726 screws implanted, 590 screws (95 patients) were studied: 584 (99%) Grade A, 5 (0.8%) Grade B, and 1 (0.2%) Grade C. Fusion was achieved in 85 out of 95 patients (89.5%). Complications included superficial infections (3/115 patients, 2.6%) and asymptomatic osteolysis (8/95 patients, 8.4%, mostly at S1). There was no screw subsidence or removal. Conclusions: Robotic-guided pedicle screw placement demonstrated exceptional accuracy (99% Grade A), high fusion success (89.5%), and minimal complications in this Spanish cohort, supporting its clinical utility for spinal instrumentation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rafael Luque Pérez (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: