TY - JOUR
T1 - R2 advances in robotic-assisted spine surgery
T2 - comparative analysis of options, future directions, and bibliometric analysis of the literature
AU - Mualem, William
AU - Onyedimma, Chiduziem
AU - Ghaith, Abdul Karim
AU - Durrani, Sulaman
AU - Jarrah, Ryan
AU - Singh, Rohin
AU - Zamanian, Cameron
AU - Nathani, Karim Rizwan
AU - Freedman, Brett A.
AU - Bydon, Mohamad
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the Charles B. and Ann L. Johnson Professorship of Neurosurgery at Mayo Clinic.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Spine surgery has undergone rapid advancements over the past several decades with the emergence of robotic and minimally invasive surgery (MIS). While conventional MIS spine surgery has had relative success, its complication profile has warranted continued efforts to improve clinical outcomes. We discuss the functional, clinical, and financial aspects of four robotic options for spinal pathologies, namely ROSA, Mazor X, Da Vinci, and ExcelsiusGPS, and conduct a bibliometric analysis to better understand current trends and applications of these robots as the field of robotic spine surgery continues to grow. An extensive search of English-language published literature on robotic-assisted spinal surgery was performed in Elsevier’s Scopus database. A bibliometric analysis was then performed on the top 100 most cited papers. The search yielded articles regarding robotic-assisted spine surgery application, limitations, and functional outcomes secondary to spine pathology. Accuracy analyses of 1733 screw placements were reviewed. The top 100 papers were published between 1992 and 2020, with a significant increase from 2015 onwards. The top publishing institution was John Hopkins University (n = 8). The top contributing author was Dr. Isador H. Lieberman (n = 6). The USA (n = 34) had the most articles on robotic spinal surgery, followed by Germany (n = 12). This review examines robotic applications in spine surgery, including four available options: ROSA, Mazor X, Da Vinci, and ExcelsiusGPS. Publication output over time, surgical outcomes, screw accuracy, and cost-effectiveness of these technologies have been investigated here. Certain robots have functional, clinical, and financial differences worth noting. Given the dearth of existing literature reporting postoperative complications and long-term comparative outcomes, there is a clear need for further studies on this matter.
AB - Spine surgery has undergone rapid advancements over the past several decades with the emergence of robotic and minimally invasive surgery (MIS). While conventional MIS spine surgery has had relative success, its complication profile has warranted continued efforts to improve clinical outcomes. We discuss the functional, clinical, and financial aspects of four robotic options for spinal pathologies, namely ROSA, Mazor X, Da Vinci, and ExcelsiusGPS, and conduct a bibliometric analysis to better understand current trends and applications of these robots as the field of robotic spine surgery continues to grow. An extensive search of English-language published literature on robotic-assisted spinal surgery was performed in Elsevier’s Scopus database. A bibliometric analysis was then performed on the top 100 most cited papers. The search yielded articles regarding robotic-assisted spine surgery application, limitations, and functional outcomes secondary to spine pathology. Accuracy analyses of 1733 screw placements were reviewed. The top 100 papers were published between 1992 and 2020, with a significant increase from 2015 onwards. The top publishing institution was John Hopkins University (n = 8). The top contributing author was Dr. Isador H. Lieberman (n = 6). The USA (n = 34) had the most articles on robotic spinal surgery, followed by Germany (n = 12). This review examines robotic applications in spine surgery, including four available options: ROSA, Mazor X, Da Vinci, and ExcelsiusGPS. Publication output over time, surgical outcomes, screw accuracy, and cost-effectiveness of these technologies have been investigated here. Certain robots have functional, clinical, and financial differences worth noting. Given the dearth of existing literature reporting postoperative complications and long-term comparative outcomes, there is a clear need for further studies on this matter.
KW - Degenerative disease
KW - Robot
KW - Spinal surgery
KW - Spine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144218700&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85144218700&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10143-022-01916-y
DO - 10.1007/s10143-022-01916-y
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36515789
AN - SCOPUS:85144218700
SN - 0344-5607
VL - 46
JO - Neurosurgical Review
JF - Neurosurgical Review
IS - 1
M1 - 18
ER -