What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate the placement accuracy, complication profile, and radiation exposure associated with a miniature robotic guidance system for minimally invasive pedicle screw implantation across two European centers.

May 1, 2017Neurosurgical FOCUSOpen Access

Evaluation of robot-guided minimally invasive implantation of 2067 pedicle screws

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

NKNaureen Keric CDChristian Doenitz AHAmer Haj

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Bi-institutional observational study reports 96.9% accuracy and low revision rates during robot-guided pedicle screw placement in 406 patients, indicating robust surgical safety.

Key Points

To evaluate the placement accuracy, complication profile, and radiation exposure associated with a miniature robotic guidance system for minimally invasive pedicle screw implantation across two European centers.
Reviewed medical records and radiographs of consecutive patients who underwent spinal instrumentation using the Renaissance miniature robot between 2011 and 2016 in Mainz and Regensburg, Germany.
Evaluated 413 operations (406 minimally invasive, 7 converted to midline conventional approach due to referencing problems) to determine screw placement accuracy on postoperative CT, fluoroscopy times, and reoperations.
Of 1857 screws evaluated by postoperative CT (out of 2067 implanted), 1799 (96.9%) had acceptable or good placement, 38 (2.0%) showed 3–6 mm deviations, and 20 (1.1%) deviated >6 mm.
Surgical revision for misplaced screws occurred in 7 of 406 patients (1.7%) and involved 9 screws (0.48% revision rate), with a mean fluoroscopy exposure of 114.4 ± 72.5 seconds per patient (averaging 5.1 screws).
Direct perioperative complications included hemorrhage in 2 patients (0.49%) and wound infections requiring revision surgery in 20 patients (4.9%).

Cite This Study

Keric et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7d6cdb560d7d74ed46cf36 https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.2.focus16552

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

May 1, 2017Neurosurgical FOCUSOpen Access

Evaluation of robot-guided minimally invasive implantation of 2067 pedicle screws

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

NKNaureen Keric CDChristian Doenitz AHAmer Haj

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Bi-institutional observational study reports 96.9% accuracy and low revision rates during robot-guided pedicle screw placement in 406 patients, indicating robust surgical safety.

Key Points

To evaluate the placement accuracy, complication profile, and radiation exposure associated with a miniature robotic guidance system for minimally invasive pedicle screw implantation across two European centers.
Reviewed medical records and radiographs of consecutive patients who underwent spinal instrumentation using the Renaissance miniature robot between 2011 and 2016 in Mainz and Regensburg, Germany.
Evaluated 413 operations (406 minimally invasive, 7 converted to midline conventional approach due to referencing problems) to determine screw placement accuracy on postoperative CT, fluoroscopy times, and reoperations.
Of 1857 screws evaluated by postoperative CT (out of 2067 implanted), 1799 (96.9%) had acceptable or good placement, 38 (2.0%) showed 3–6 mm deviations, and 20 (1.1%) deviated >6 mm.
Surgical revision for misplaced screws occurred in 7 of 406 patients (1.7%) and involved 9 screws (0.48% revision rate), with a mean fluoroscopy exposure of 114.4 ± 72.5 seconds per patient (averaging 5.1 screws).
Direct perioperative complications included hemorrhage in 2 patients (0.49%) and wound infections requiring revision surgery in 20 patients (4.9%).

Cite This Study

Keric et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7d6cdb560d7d74ed46cf36 https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.2.focus16552

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark