机器人辅助皮质骨轨迹椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性:基于ct的回顾性队列研究。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
C Minnaert, K VAN DER Donckt, A Depraetere, B Demoor, L Plasschaert, F Plasschaert
{"title":"机器人辅助皮质骨轨迹椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性:基于ct的回顾性队列研究。","authors":"C Minnaert, K VAN DER Donckt, A Depraetere, B Demoor, L Plasschaert, F Plasschaert","doi":"10.52628/92.3.15786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Pedicle screw placement accuracy is critical for safe spinal fixation, and robot- assisted techniques aim to improve precision. This study evaluated the accuracy of robot-assisted posterior pedicle screw placement in the lower thoracic and lumbar spine using a CBT trajectory as well as determine what factors are associated with accuracy of screw placement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective single-centre cohort study included 100 consecutive patients undergoing Aposterior spinal instrumentation with pedicle screws between August 2022 and August 2023. Preoperative CT- based planning and robotic guidance (ExcelsiusGPS) were used. Postoperative CT assessed 511 screws using the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, including breach direction. Clinically acceptable placement was defined as grades or B. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using Cohen's kappa and Gwet's AC1. Multivariable analyses were performed using generalized estimating equations and mixed-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinically acceptable screw placement exceeded 96% at all spinal levels. Perfect placement ranged from 86.7% to 100%. No clinically relevant (Grade C-E) medial, superior, or inferior breaches were observed; lateral breaches occurred in 1.4%. Interobserver agreement was high (AC1 0.953-0.994). For perfect placement (Grade A), L5 showed higher odds compared to L4.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement using CBT demonstrates high accuracy and safety, with absence of clinically relevant medial breaches. These findings support the use of robotic guidance as an effective adjunct in spinal instrumentation.</p>","PeriodicalId":7018,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","volume":"92 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of robot-assisted cortical bone trajectory pedicle screw placement: CT-based retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"C Minnaert, K VAN DER Donckt, A Depraetere, B Demoor, L Plasschaert, F Plasschaert\",\"doi\":\"10.52628/92.3.15786\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Pedicle screw placement accuracy is critical for safe spinal fixation, and robot- assisted techniques aim to improve precision. This study evaluated the accuracy of robot-assisted posterior pedicle screw placement in the lower thoracic and lumbar spine using a CBT trajectory as well as determine what factors are associated with accuracy of screw placement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective single-centre cohort study included 100 consecutive patients undergoing Aposterior spinal instrumentation with pedicle screws between August 2022 and August 2023. Preoperative CT- based planning and robotic guidance (ExcelsiusGPS) were used. Postoperative CT assessed 511 screws using the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, including breach direction. Clinically acceptable placement was defined as grades or B. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using Cohen's kappa and Gwet's AC1. Multivariable analyses were performed using generalized estimating equations and mixed-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinically acceptable screw placement exceeded 96% at all spinal levels. Perfect placement ranged from 86.7% to 100%. No clinically relevant (Grade C-E) medial, superior, or inferior breaches were observed; lateral breaches occurred in 1.4%. Interobserver agreement was high (AC1 0.953-0.994). For perfect placement (Grade A), L5 showed higher odds compared to L4.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement using CBT demonstrates high accuracy and safety, with absence of clinically relevant medial breaches. These findings support the use of robotic guidance as an effective adjunct in spinal instrumentation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7018,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta orthopaedica Belgica\",\"volume\":\"92 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta orthopaedica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52628/92.3.15786\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52628/92.3.15786","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和研究目的:椎弓根螺钉放置的准确性对安全的脊柱固定至关重要,机器人辅助技术旨在提高精度。本研究利用CBT轨迹评估了机器人辅助下胸椎和腰椎后路椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性,并确定了与螺钉置入准确性相关的因素。材料和方法:一项回顾性单中心队列研究,纳入了2022年8月至2023年8月期间连续100例接受椎弓根螺钉后置脊柱内固定的患者。术前使用基于CT的计划和机器人引导(ExcelsiusGPS)。术后CT采用Gertzbein-Robbins分类对511颗螺钉进行评估,包括骨折方向。临床可接受的位置定义为分级或b级。使用Cohen's kappa和Gwet's AC1评估观察者间的一致性。采用广义估计方程和混合效应模型进行多变量分析。结果:临床可接受的螺钉置入率超过96%。完美安置范围从86.7%到100%。未观察到临床相关(C-E级)内侧、上、下切口;侧向破口发生率为1.4%。观察者间一致性高(AC1 0.953-0.994)。对于完美放置(A级),L5比L4有更高的几率。结论:CBT机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉置入具有较高的准确性和安全性,没有临床相关的医疗违规。这些发现支持将机器人引导作为脊柱内固定的有效辅助手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy of robot-assisted cortical bone trajectory pedicle screw placement: CT-based retrospective cohort study.

Background and study aims: Pedicle screw placement accuracy is critical for safe spinal fixation, and robot- assisted techniques aim to improve precision. This study evaluated the accuracy of robot-assisted posterior pedicle screw placement in the lower thoracic and lumbar spine using a CBT trajectory as well as determine what factors are associated with accuracy of screw placement.

Materials and methods: A retrospective single-centre cohort study included 100 consecutive patients undergoing Aposterior spinal instrumentation with pedicle screws between August 2022 and August 2023. Preoperative CT- based planning and robotic guidance (ExcelsiusGPS) were used. Postoperative CT assessed 511 screws using the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, including breach direction. Clinically acceptable placement was defined as grades or B. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using Cohen's kappa and Gwet's AC1. Multivariable analyses were performed using generalized estimating equations and mixed-effects models.

Results: Clinically acceptable screw placement exceeded 96% at all spinal levels. Perfect placement ranged from 86.7% to 100%. No clinically relevant (Grade C-E) medial, superior, or inferior breaches were observed; lateral breaches occurred in 1.4%. Interobserver agreement was high (AC1 0.953-0.994). For perfect placement (Grade A), L5 showed higher odds compared to L4.

Conclusion: Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement using CBT demonstrates high accuracy and safety, with absence of clinically relevant medial breaches. These findings support the use of robotic guidance as an effective adjunct in spinal instrumentation.

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
Acta orthopaedica Belgica
Acta orthopaedica Belgica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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
小红书