Robotic vs. free-hand screw placement for spinal deformity: 5 things to know

Written by Laura Dyrda | January 30, 2017 | Print  |

A new study published in Clinical Spine Surgery examines patients who underwent spinal deformity correction with robotic guidance for S2-alar-iliac screw insertion. 

There were 14 patients included in the study with 31 screws placed using either the robot or free-hand probing. The researchers found:


1. The average screw length was 80 mm and all trajectories were confirmed as accurate.


2. The manual screw insertion resulted in 10- protrusions less than 2 mm, one that was 2 mm to 4 mm and six that were greater than 4 mm.


3. None of the screws were intrapelvic or risked visceral or neuromuscular structures.


4. None of the screws required removal or revision.


5. The screws more than 80 mm were associated with distal protrusion, according to the study abstract.


"Robotic-guided S2AI screws are accurate and a feasible option," concluded the study authors. "Although no complications from protrusion were identified, larger studies and instrumentation modifications are required to assess the clinical acceptance of robotic guidance in sacropelvic fixation."


More articles on spine surgery:
5 reasons why spine care will boom in the next decade
Spine care in 2017: 4 spine surgeons make predictions
5 things to know about gunshot-induced spinal cord injury: Is surgery overused?

© Copyright ASC COMMUNICATIONS 2020. Interested in LINKING to or REPRINTING this content? View our policies here.

Featured Webinars

Featured Whitepapers