机器人脊柱手术中螺钉置入不准确的危险因素:机器人为什么会出错以及如何避免?

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
S Vidyadhara, R Dinesh Iyer, Abhishek Soni, T Balamurugan, Dhiyanesh Krishnamurthy
{"title":"机器人脊柱手术中螺钉置入不准确的危险因素:机器人为什么会出错以及如何避免?","authors":"S Vidyadhara, R Dinesh Iyer, Abhishek Soni, T Balamurugan, Dhiyanesh Krishnamurthy","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02884-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study design is retrospective study. Robotic spine surgery has evolved rapidly over the past two decades, with growing adoption. However, research on error sources in robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement remains scarce. This study investigates the incidence, risk factors, and intraoperative error types linked to screw malposition. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent robotic-assisted thoracic and lumbar spine surgeries at our center since Oct 2023. The incidence of screw breaches, intraoperative errors, and risk factors, such as BMI, pathology, and surgical approach, were assessed. Screw malpositions were identified on postoperative O-arm scans and classified by error cause. Intraoperative revision protocols were documented. A total of 1060 patients (5644 pedicle screws) were included. Screw malposition occurred in 13 patients (1.2%) involving 22 screws (0.39%). The mean BMI of patients with malposition was 27.3 versus 26.5 overall. Among the 13 cases, 8 had lumbar degenerative pathology, 3 scoliosis, 1 high-grade listhesis, and 1 revision for proximal junctional failure. Skiving was the most frequent error (6 cases), followed by arm shift (4), patient movement (2), and registration error (1). Learning curve had a significant role with 12/22 screw malpositioning happening in the initial 50 robotic cases. No significant correlation was found between malposition and pathology type or surgical approach. Robotic systems improve pedicle screw accuracy but are not immune to errors. Skiving is the most common issue and can be minimized by selecting flat bony entry points and avoiding sloping surfaces. Other causes include arm shift, patient movement, and registration errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"681"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk factors of inaccurate screw placement in robotic spine surgeries: why do robots make error and how to avoid them?\",\"authors\":\"S Vidyadhara, R Dinesh Iyer, Abhishek Soni, T Balamurugan, Dhiyanesh Krishnamurthy\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11701-025-02884-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study design is retrospective study. Robotic spine surgery has evolved rapidly over the past two decades, with growing adoption. However, research on error sources in robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement remains scarce. This study investigates the incidence, risk factors, and intraoperative error types linked to screw malposition. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent robotic-assisted thoracic and lumbar spine surgeries at our center since Oct 2023. The incidence of screw breaches, intraoperative errors, and risk factors, such as BMI, pathology, and surgical approach, were assessed. Screw malpositions were identified on postoperative O-arm scans and classified by error cause. Intraoperative revision protocols were documented. A total of 1060 patients (5644 pedicle screws) were included. Screw malposition occurred in 13 patients (1.2%) involving 22 screws (0.39%). The mean BMI of patients with malposition was 27.3 versus 26.5 overall. Among the 13 cases, 8 had lumbar degenerative pathology, 3 scoliosis, 1 high-grade listhesis, and 1 revision for proximal junctional failure. Skiving was the most frequent error (6 cases), followed by arm shift (4), patient movement (2), and registration error (1). Learning curve had a significant role with 12/22 screw malpositioning happening in the initial 50 robotic cases. No significant correlation was found between malposition and pathology type or surgical approach. Robotic systems improve pedicle screw accuracy but are not immune to errors. Skiving is the most common issue and can be minimized by selecting flat bony entry points and avoiding sloping surfaces. Other causes include arm shift, patient movement, and registration errors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"681\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02884-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02884-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究设计为回顾性研究。机器人脊柱手术在过去的二十年里发展迅速,越来越多的人采用。然而,对机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉置入误差来源的研究仍然很少。本研究探讨与螺钉错位相关的发生率、危险因素和术中错误类型。我们回顾性分析了自2023年10月以来在我们中心接受机器人辅助胸腰椎手术的患者。评估螺钉断裂、术中错误和危险因素(如BMI、病理和手术入路)的发生率。术后o型臂扫描发现螺钉错位,并根据错误原因进行分类。记录术中翻修方案。共纳入1060例患者(5644枚椎弓根螺钉)。螺钉错位13例(1.2%),共22颗螺钉(0.39%)。体位异常患者的平均BMI为27.3,而总体为26.5。13例患者中,8例有腰椎退行性病理,3例脊柱侧凸,1例高度脱位,1例近端结膜失败翻修。滑动是最常见的错误(6例),其次是手臂移位(4例),患者运动(2例)和注册错误(1例)。在最初的50例机器人病例中,学习曲线对12/22螺钉错位有重要作用。移位与病理类型及手术入路无明显相关性。机器人系统提高了椎弓根螺钉的精度,但也不能避免错误。划伤是最常见的问题,可以通过选择平坦的骨入口点和避免倾斜的表面来最小化。其他原因包括手臂移位、患者运动和登记错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk factors of inaccurate screw placement in robotic spine surgeries: why do robots make error and how to avoid them?

The study design is retrospective study. Robotic spine surgery has evolved rapidly over the past two decades, with growing adoption. However, research on error sources in robotic-assisted pedicle screw placement remains scarce. This study investigates the incidence, risk factors, and intraoperative error types linked to screw malposition. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent robotic-assisted thoracic and lumbar spine surgeries at our center since Oct 2023. The incidence of screw breaches, intraoperative errors, and risk factors, such as BMI, pathology, and surgical approach, were assessed. Screw malpositions were identified on postoperative O-arm scans and classified by error cause. Intraoperative revision protocols were documented. A total of 1060 patients (5644 pedicle screws) were included. Screw malposition occurred in 13 patients (1.2%) involving 22 screws (0.39%). The mean BMI of patients with malposition was 27.3 versus 26.5 overall. Among the 13 cases, 8 had lumbar degenerative pathology, 3 scoliosis, 1 high-grade listhesis, and 1 revision for proximal junctional failure. Skiving was the most frequent error (6 cases), followed by arm shift (4), patient movement (2), and registration error (1). Learning curve had a significant role with 12/22 screw malpositioning happening in the initial 50 robotic cases. No significant correlation was found between malposition and pathology type or surgical approach. Robotic systems improve pedicle screw accuracy but are not immune to errors. Skiving is the most common issue and can be minimized by selecting flat bony entry points and avoiding sloping surfaces. Other causes include arm shift, patient movement, and registration errors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信