Augmented reality–assisted pedicle screw insertion: a cadaveric proof-of-concept study

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilo A. Molina ◽  
Nicholas Theodore ◽  
A. Karim Ahmed ◽  
Erick M. Westbroek ◽  
Yigal Mirovsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
User Experience ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Insertion Method ◽  
Comparative Accuracy ◽  
Placement Accuracy ◽  
Surgical Field

OBJECTIVEAugmented reality (AR) is a novel technology that has the potential to increase the technical feasibility, accuracy, and safety of conventional manual and robotic computer-navigated pedicle insertion methods. Visual data are directly projected to the operator’s retina and overlaid onto the surgical field, thereby removing the requirement to shift attention to a remote display. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative accuracy of AR-assisted pedicle screw insertion in comparison to conventional pedicle screw insertion methods.METHODSFive cadaveric male torsos were instrumented bilaterally from T6 to L5 for a total of 120 inserted pedicle screws. Postprocedural CT scans were obtained, and screw insertion accuracy was graded by 2 independent neuroradiologists using both the Gertzbein scale (GS) and a combination of that scale and the Heary classification, referred to in this paper as the Heary-Gertzbein scale (HGS). Non-inferiority analysis was performed, comparing the accuracy to freehand, manual computer-navigated, and robotics-assisted computer-navigated insertion accuracy rates reported in the literature. User experience analysis was conducted via a user experience questionnaire filled out by operators after the procedures.RESULTSThe overall screw placement accuracy achieved with the AR system was 96.7% based on the HGS and 94.6% based on the GS. Insertion accuracy was non-inferior to accuracy reported for manual computer-navigated pedicle insertion based on both the GS and the HGS scores. When compared to accuracy reported for robotics-assisted computer-navigated insertion, accuracy achieved with the AR system was found to be non-inferior when assessed with the GS, but superior when assessed with the HGS. Last, accuracy results achieved with the AR system were found to be superior to results obtained with freehand insertion based on both the HGS and the GS scores. Accuracy results were not found to be inferior in any comparison. User experience analysis yielded “excellent” usability classification.CONCLUSIONSAR-assisted pedicle screw insertion is a technically feasible and accurate insertion method.

scholarly journals Does the application of Robotics improve outcomes of pedicle screw insertion in spine surgery compared to conventional fluoroscopy guidance? A protocol for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Kumar ◽  
Vishnu Baburaj ◽  
Prasoon Kumar ◽  
Sarvdeep Singh Dhatt
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Fluoroscopy Guidance

AbstractBackgroundPedicle screw insertion is routinely carried out in spine surgery that has traditionally been performed under fluoroscopy guidance. Robotic guidance has recently gained popularity in order to improve the accuracy of screw placement. However, it is unclear whether the use of robotics alters the accuracy of screw placement or clinical outcomes.ObjectivesThis systematic review aims to compare the results of pedicle screws inserted under fluoroscopy guidance, with those inserted under robotic guidance, in terms of both short-term radiographic outcomes, as well as long-term clinical outcomes.MethodsThis systematic review will be conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search will be conducted on the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Ovid with a pre-determined search strategy. A manual bibliography search of included studies will also be done. Original articles in English that directly compare pedicle screw insertion under robotic guidance to those inserted under fluoroscopy guidance will be included. Data on outcomes will be extracted from included studies and analysis carried out with the help of appropriate software.

Machine vision augmented reality for pedicle screw insertion during spine surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 350-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nhu Q. Nguyen ◽  
Stefano M. Priola ◽  
Joel M. Ramjist ◽  
Daipayan Guha ◽  
Yuta Dobashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Machine Vision ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion

Biomechanical Effects of Lumbar Pedicle Screw Insertion Depth on Screw Loosening and Fulcrum Location

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E. Buckenmeyer ◽  
Kristophe J. Karami ◽  
Ata M. Kiapour ◽  
Vijay K. Goel ◽  
Constantine K. Demetropoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Loosening ◽  
Pullout Strength ◽  
Insertion Depth ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Screw Length

Osteoporosis is a critical challenge in orthopedic surgery. Osteoporotic patients have an increased risk of loosening and failure of implant constructs due to a weaker bone-implant interface than with healthy bone. Pullout strength of pedicle screws is enhanced by increased screw insertion depth. However, more knowledge is needed to define optimal pedicle screw insertion depth in relation to screw-bone interface biomechanics and the resulting loosening risk. This study evaluates the effects of screw length on loosening risk in the osteoporotic lumbar spine.

scholarly journals CT-to-fluoroscopy registration versus scan-and-plan registration for robot-assisted insertion of lumbar pedicle screws

2022 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. E8
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Registration Method ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Radiology Reports ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle

OBJECTIVE Pedicle screw insertion for stabilization after lumbar fusion surgery is commonly performed by spine surgeons. With the advent of navigation technology, the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion has increased. Robotic guidance has revolutionized the placement of pedicle screws with 2 distinct radiographic registration methods, the scan-and-plan method and CT-to-fluoroscopy method. In this study, the authors aimed to compare the accuracy and safety of these methods. METHODS A retrospective chart review was conducted at 2 centers to obtain operative data for consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted lumbar pedicle screw placement. The newest robotic platform (Mazor X Robotic System) was used in all cases. One center used the scan-and-plan registration method, and the other used CT-to-fluoroscopy for registration. Screw accuracy was determined by applying the Gertzbein-Robbins scale. Fluoroscopic exposure times were collected from radiology reports. RESULTS Overall, 268 patients underwent pedicle screw insertion, 126 patients with scan-and-plan registration and 142 with CT-to-fluoroscopy registration. In the scan-and-plan cohort, 450 screws were inserted across 266 spinal levels (mean 1.7 ± 1.1 screws/level), with 446 (99.1%) screws classified as Gertzbein-Robbins grade A (within the pedicle) and 4 (0.9%) as grade B (< 2-mm deviation). In the CT-to-fluoroscopy cohort, 574 screws were inserted across 280 lumbar spinal levels (mean 2.05 ± 1.7 screws/ level), with 563 (98.1%) grade A screws and 11 (1.9%) grade B (p = 0.17). The scan-and-plan cohort had nonsignificantly less fluoroscopic exposure per screw than the CT-to-fluoroscopy cohort (12 ± 13 seconds vs 11.1 ± 7 seconds, p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS Both scan-and-plan registration and CT-to-fluoroscopy registration methods were safe, accurate, and had similar fluoroscopy time exposure overall.

Accuracy of augmented reality surgical navigation for minimally invasive pedicle screw insertion in the thoracic and lumbar spine with a new tracking device

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 629-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Peh ◽  
Anindita Chatterjea ◽  
Julian Pfarr ◽  
Jost Philipp Schäfer ◽  
Matthias Weuster ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Surgical Navigation ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Thoracic And Lumbar Spine ◽  
Tracking Device

scholarly journals Comparison of intraoperative O-arm- and conventional fluoroscopy (C-arm)-assisted insertion of pedicle screws in the treatment of fracture of thoracic vertebrae

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 230949901668409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Liu ◽  
Yimeng Wang ◽  
Bin Pi ◽  
Zhonglai Qian ◽  
Xiaoyu Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Thoracic Vertebrae ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Computed Tomography Images ◽  
Hospitalization Time ◽  
Time Required

Purpose: To introduce the intraoperative O-arm-assisted pedicle screw insertion without any navigation system in the treatment of thoracic vertebrae fracture and compare it to conventional fluoroscopy (C-arm)-assisted pedicle screw insertion technique. Methods: About 156 pedicle screws were inserted in 23 patients (C-arm group), and 208 pedicle screws were inserted in 30 patients (O-arm group). The postoperative computed tomography images were analyzed for pedicle violation based on Gertzbein classification. The total surgery time, the average time required for inserting a screw, the mean action times of adjusting guide probe and pedicle screw, and the hospitalization time were compared in both groups, respectively. The American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) was used for evaluating the health outcomes pre- and postoperatively. Results: There are the higher accuracy rate of satisfactory pedicle screw placement (grades 0 and 1) and the less incidence of medial perforation in the O-arm group compared to the C-arm group ( p < 0.05). The average time required for inserting a screw, the action times of adjusting the guide probe and pedicle screw, and the hospitalization time in the O-arm group are less than the respective ones in the C-arm group ( p < 0.05). There was no significant difference for the total surgery time between both groups. No further damage of the nerve function postoperatively is found according to the ASIA grade. Conclusion: The O-arm-assisted pedicle screw insertion without navigation we described provides higher accuracy of pedicle screw placement and better clinical efficacy compared to conventional fluoroscopy (C-arm) technique.

scholarly journals Patient-Specific Templates for Pedicle Screw Insertion in Spinal Fixation Surgery

10.29007/kbf7 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Hafez ◽  
Mohamed Fouda
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
3D Model ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Scoliosis Surgery ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Surgery Patient

The increased use of pedicle screws in scoliosis creates a challenge for accurate and safe placement ofscrew within the pedicle during the scoliosis surgery. Patient-specific templates (PST) is a novelmethod to guide the surgeons for allocating and detecting the positions and trajectories of pediclescrews in scoliosis surgery. Based on CT-scans and according to certain protocol, this technique willallow the surgeon to construct a 3D model of spine and present the stage and vertebrae which containthe most deformed bone. With preplanned surgery on specific software, we can develop an accurateand safe position of pedicle screws and its trajectories. This method has the ability to customize theplacement and the size of each pedicle screw based on the unique morphology and landmarks of thevertebrae.

scholarly journals Effective dose of radiation per screw in surgery of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: matched pair analysis of 293 pedicle screws inserted using three different techniques

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 554-561
Author(s):  
Markus Rafael Konieczny ◽  
Johannes Boos ◽  
Andrea Steuwe ◽  
Christoph Schleich ◽  
Max Prost ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis ◽  
Idiopathic Scoliosis ◽  
Effective Dose ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Image Acquisition ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Group 1

Purpose Reports on heterogenous groups of patients have indicated that pedicle screw insertion guided by navigation (PIN) leads to, for the patient, higher doses of radiation compared with pedicle screw insertion guided by fluoroscopy (PIF). This would be a major concern, especially in paediatric deformity correction. Methods After a power analysis (aiming at > 0.8) 293 pedicle screws which were inserted in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis were analyzed by comparing effective dose and fluoroscopy time per screw for three different techniques. Groups 2 and 3 were matched to Group 1 by Lenke type of scoliosis. Group 1 were prospectively enrolled consecutive patients that have been operated on by PIN with image acquisition by preoperative CT scan (CTS). Group 2 were consecutive retrospectively matched patients who have been operated on by PIN with image acquisition by an intraoperative 3D scan (3DS). Group 3 were consecutive retrospectively matched patients who have been operated on by PIF. Results Mean dose of radiation per screw was 1.0 mSv (sd 0.8) per screw in CTS patients, 0.025 mSv (sd 0.001) per screw in 3DS patients and 0.781 mSv (sd 0.12) per screw in PIF patients. The difference was significant (p < 0.0001). Conclusion When we compared different techniques of navigation, navigation by image acquisition with CTS showed a significantly higher (by 97.5%) dose of radiation per screw for the patient than navigation by image acquisition by a 3DS. Navigation by 3DS showed significantly lower effective dose per screw for the adolescent patients than the fluoroscopic technique. Level of Evidence: II

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document