Nov
Issue
18 49 Todd Albert: Prioritising physician well-being
Page 6
Christopher Bono: The rise of predatory publishing
Page 7
Costs curbing the rise of robotics in spinal surgery
The era of routine robotic-assisted spinal surgery is on the horizon. Despite the hype, however, there remains little market penetration, with affordability and the degree of valueadded by such technology representing significant barriers to complete disruption of standard practice.
Donna Ohnmeiss:
Profile
Page 12
Augmented reality surgical navigation technology enables high accuracy pedicle screw placement A recent study has found new technology utilising augmented reality surgical navigation can be clinically used to place pedicle screws, enabling both high accuracy and an acceptable navigation time. The results were presented by Gustav Burström, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden, at the Eurospine 2018 annual meeting (19–21 September, Barcelona, Spain).
I
n a recent literature review published in Spine, Srinivas Prasad (Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, USA) concluded: “It is no longer a question of whether robotics has a role in spine surgery, but rather how and when.” Advantages of robotics include improved accuracy and consistency, and many have postulated that robotics could render complex spinal surgeries as easy as the simplest spine operations, reducing human error and surgical morbidity. However, many barriers remain before the use of robotics in spinal surgeries becomes routine. Surgical applications for robotics truly emerged in the 1980s, with the adaptation and subsequent adoption of industrial robots. In 2001, Mazor Robotics (Caesarea, Israel) launched the first surgical robot specifically targeting applications in spinal surgery. The company released SpineAssist in 2004. Today, there are a limited number of spine robotic systems: Mazor X and Renaissance (both Medtronic, which acquired Mazor in Autumn 2018), Excelsius GPS (Globus Medical), ROSA (Zimmer biomet, which acquired the ROSA developers Medtech in 2017), and the recently introduced robotic offering from Chinese robots company Tinavi Medical Technology. Speaking to Spinal News International, Vikas Patel (Spine Center, University of Colorado Hospital, Aurora,
USA) hypothesises that the next technological leap for robotics in spinal surgery will potentially come from combining the capabilities of robots currently used in gynaecology, urology, and general surgery. He explains, “The next real leap will be in the ability of robots to safely handle soft tissues. In spine especially, we need them to be strong and stable when placing screws, but gentle enough to retract a nerve or work around the spinal cord. Some of this ability can come with ‘no fly zones’ to protect the nerves, but the real leap will be when they can gently handle the soft tissues the way a surgeon would. Then they might even be able to help suture the incision—that would be a huge benefit!” Today’s robotic offerings in the spinal space function as guidance devices. They help line up channels and cannulas to correctly place pedicle screws or other instruments within the patient anatomy. Addressing assembled delegates at the North American Spine Society (NASS) annual meeting (26–29 September, Los Angeles, USA) concerning the integration of robotics into the operating room, Prasad explained how the machines work: “There are two principle modules, and of course navigated instruments as well. There is the platform with the robotic arm itself, with a screen that is sterilely wrapped that the surgeon can manipulate and plan on Continued on page 2
WHILE BOTH VIRTUAL reality and augmented reality have the remarkable ability to alter the user’s perception, the immersive experience of the two can dramatically differ. Unlike virtual reality, which creates a simulated environment, augmented reality overlays digital elements into the real world. In the case of spine surgery, these digital elements are superimposed onto the patient’s anatomy. Burström acknowledged the recent progression of surgical techniques, “Today we see a number of trends in spine surgery; image-guided surgery and navigation is widely used and widely studied, and [alongside] those, 3D imaging in the operating room is on the rise.” He noted that the literature depicts a wide variation of accuracies reported for pedicle screw placement. In meta-analyses, many studies report superiority for navigation compared to free-hand. However, this finding was not reported by all studies and cannot be extended to all indications. For these reasons, Burström and colleagues aimed to study a specific solution to navigation and examine how it performs in complex spinal procedures. The study was performed in a hybrid operating room with an integrated augmented reality surgical navigation system encompassing a surgical table and a motorised flat detector C-arm with intraoperative 2D and 3D capabilities. Finally, integrated cameras were used both for tracking the patient and also in order to provide a video feed, allowing the investigators to superimpose the augmented reality view. In order to assess this technology, the authors enrolled 20 patients with varying spinal indications for surgery all requiring screw placement (14 Continued on page 5