Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025
A Spine Robotic-Assisted Navigation System for Pedicle Screw Placement
Published on: May 11, 2020
A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study Comparing 3 Different Spine Pedicle Screw Fixation Methods: Freehand,
Yoon Ha Hwang1, Byeong-Jin Ha2,3, Hyung Cheol Kim2,4
1Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Objective:
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery.
Methods:
This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate.
Results:
Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients' age.
Conclusion:
This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.
