What is the Comparison in Robot Time Per Screw, Radiation Exposure, Robot Abandonment, Screw Accuracy, and Clinical Outcomes Between Percutaneous and Open Robot-Assisted Short Lumbar Fusion?
Spine(2021)SCI 2区
Columbia Univ Med Ctr | New York Inst Technol | Univ Virginia Hlth Syst | SUNY Buffalo | Virginia Spine Inst
Abstract
Study Design. Multicenter cohort. Objective. To compare the robot time/screw, radiation exposure, robot abandonment, screw accuracy, and 90-day outcomes between robot-assisted percutaneous and robot-assisted open approach for short lumbar fusion (1- and 2-level). Summary of Background Data. There is conflicting literature on the superiority of robot-assisted minimally invasive spine surgery to open techniques. A large, multicenter study is needed to further elucidate the outcomes and complications between these two approaches. Methods. We included adult patients (≥18 yrs old) who underwent robot-assisted short lumbar fusion surgery from 2015 to 2019 at four independent institutions. A propensity score matching algorithm was employed to control for the potential selection bias between percutaneous and open surgery. The minimum follow-up was 90 days after the index surgery. Results. After propensity score matching, 310 patients remained. The mean (standard deviation) Charlson comorbidity index was 1.6 (1.5) and 53% of patients were female. The most common diagnoses included high-grade spondylolisthesis (grade >2) (48%), degenerative disc disease (22%), and spinal stenosis (25%), and the mean number of instrumented levels was 1.5(0.5). The operative time was longer in the open (198 min) versus the percutaneous group (167 min, P value = 0.007). However, the robot time/screw was similar between cohorts (P value > 0.05). The fluoroscopy time/ screw for percutaneous (14.4 s) was longer than the open group (10.1 s, P value = 0.021). The rates for screw exchange and robot abandonment were similar between groups (P value > 0.05). The estimated blood loss (open: 146 mL vs. percutaneous: 61.3 mL, P value < 0.001) and transfusion rate (open: 3.9% vs. percutaneous: 0%, P value = 0.013) were greater for the open group. The 90-day complication rate and mean length of stay were not different between cohorts (P value > 0.05). Conclusion. Percutaneous robot-assisted spine surgery may increase radiation exposure, but can achieve a shorter operative time and lower risk for intraoperative blood loss for short-lumbar fusion. Percutaneous approaches do not appear to have an advantage for other short-term postoperative outcomes. Future multicenter studies on longer fusion surgeries and the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes are needed. Level of Evidence: 3
MoreTranslated text
Key words
lumbar spine surgery,minimally invasive spine surgery,multicenter,percutaneous spine surgery,posterior lumbar fusion,radiation exposure,robot abandonment,robot time per screw,robot-assisted spine surgery,short-term complications
求助PDF
上传PDF
View via Publisher
AI Read Science
AI Summary
AI Summary is the key point extracted automatically understanding the full text of the paper, including the background, methods, results, conclusions, icons and other key content, so that you can get the outline of the paper at a glance.
Example
Background
Key content
Introduction
Methods
Results
Related work
Fund
Key content
- Pretraining has recently greatly promoted the development of natural language processing (NLP)
- We show that M6 outperforms the baselines in multimodal downstream tasks, and the large M6 with 10 parameters can reach a better performance
- We propose a method called M6 that is able to process information of multiple modalities and perform both single-modal and cross-modal understanding and generation
- The model is scaled to large model with 10 billion parameters with sophisticated deployment, and the 10 -parameter M6-large is the largest pretrained model in Chinese
- Experimental results show that our proposed M6 outperforms the baseline in a number of downstream tasks concerning both single modality and multiple modalities We will continue the pretraining of extremely large models by increasing data to explore the limit of its performance
Upload PDF to Generate Summary
Must-Reading Tree
Example

Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Related Papers
World Neurosurgery 2021
被引用10
Frontiers in Surgery 2022
被引用1
BMC Surgery 2022
被引用12
Robotic Navigation During Spine Surgery: an Update of Literature.
EXPERT REVIEW OF MEDICAL DEVICES 2023
被引用2
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL 2024
被引用0
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL 2023
被引用0
Data Disclaimer
The page data are from open Internet sources, cooperative publishers and automatic analysis results through AI technology. We do not make any commitments and guarantees for the validity, accuracy, correctness, reliability, completeness and timeliness of the page data. If you have any questions, please contact us by email: report@aminer.cn
Chat Paper
GPU is busy, summary generation fails
Rerequest