Robot-navigated pedicle screw insertion can reduce intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay: analysis of 1,633 patients utilizing propensity score matching

Spine J. 2024 Jan;24(1):118-124. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.09.004. Epub 2023 Sep 12.

Abstract

Background context: Navigation and robotic technologies have emerged as an alternative option to conventional freehand techniques for pedicle screw insertion. However, the effectiveness of these technologies in reducing the perioperative complications of spinal fusion surgery remains limited due to the small cohort size in the existing literature.

Purpose: To investigate whether utilization of robotically navigated pedicle screw insertion can reduce the perioperative complications of spinal fusion surgery-including reoperations-with a sizeable cohort.

Study design: Retrospective study.

Patient sample: Patients who underwent primary lumbar fusion surgery between 2019 and 2022.

Outcome measures: Perioperative complications including readmission, reoperation, its reasons, estimated blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay.

Methods: Patients' data were collected including age, sex, race, body mass index, upper-instrumented vertebra, lower-instrumented vertebra, number of screws inserted, and primary procedure name. Patients were classified into the following two groups: freehand group and robot group. The variable-ratio greedy matching was utilized to create the matched cohorts by propensity score and compared the outcomes between the two group.

Results: A total of 1,633 patients who underwent primary instrumented spinal lumbar fusion surgery were initially identified (freehand 1,286; robot 347). After variable ratio matching was performed with age, sex, body mass index, fused levels, and upper instrumented vertebrae level, 694 patients in the freehand group and 347 patients in robot groups were selected. The robot group showed less estimated blood loss (418.9±398.9 vs 199.2±239.6 ml; p<.001), shorter LOS (4.1±3.1 vs 3.2±3.0 days; p<.001) and similar operative time (212.5 vs 222.0 minutes; p=.151). Otherwise, there was no significant difference in readmission rate (3.6% vs 2.6%; p=.498), reoperation rate (3.2% vs 2.6%; p=.498), and screw malposition requiring reoperation (five cases, 0.7% vs one case, 0.3%; p=1.000).

Conclusions: Perioperative complications requiring readmission and reoperation were similar between fluoroscopy guided freehand and robotic surgery. Robot-guided pedicle screw insertion can enhance surgical efficiency by reducing intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay without extending operative time.

Keywords: Complications; Navigation; Revision surgery; Robotic pedicle screw placement; Robotic surgery; Screw malposition; Spinal fusion surgery.

MeSH terms

  • Blood Loss, Surgical / prevention & control
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay
  • Lumbar Vertebrae / surgery
  • Pedicle Screws* / adverse effects
  • Propensity Score
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Robotics*
  • Spinal Fusion* / adverse effects
  • Spinal Fusion* / methods