Risk of Postoperative Complications and Revision Surgery Following Robot-assisted Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion

Daniel S Yang ¹, Neill Y Li ², Dominic T Kleinhenz ², Shyam Patel ², Alan H Daniels ²Affiliations expand

SPINE: December 15, 2020 – Volume 45 – Issue 24 – p E1692-E1698

• PMID: 32956252
• DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003701

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective Study.

Objective: This investigation examined matched cohorts of lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) patients undergoing robot-assisted and conventional LSF to compare risk of revision, 30-day readmission, 30-day complications, and postoperative opioid utilization.

Summary of background data: Patient outcomes and complication rates associated with robot-assisted LSF compared to conventional fusion techniques are incompletely understood.

Methods: The PearlDiver Research Program (www.pearldiverinc.com) was used to identify patients undergoing primary LSF between 2011 and 2017. Patients receiving robot-assisted or conventional LSF were matched using key demographic and comorbidity variables. Indication for revision was also studied. Risk of revision, 30-day readmission, 30-day complications, and postoperative opioid utilization at 1 and 6 months was compared between the cohorts using multivariable logistic regression additionally controlling for age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index.

Results: The percent of LSFs that were robot-assisted rose by 169% from 2011 to 2017, increasing linearly each year (p = 0.0007). Matching resulted in 2528 patients in each cohort for analysis. Robot-assisted LSF patients experienced higher risk of revision (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.35, P ? 0.0001), 30-day readmission (aOR = 1.39, P = 0.0002), and total 30-day complications (aOR = 1.50, P < 0.0001), specifically respiratory (aOR = 1.56, P = 0.0006), surgical site infection (aOR = 1.56, P = 0.0061), and implant-related complications (aOR = 1.74, P = 0.0038). The risk of revision due to infection after robot-assisted LSF was an estimated 4.5-fold higher (aOR = 4.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.95-12.04, P = 0.0011). Furthermore, robot-assisted LSF had increased risk of revision due to instrument failure (aOR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.05-2.58, P = 0.0300), and pseudarthrosis (aOR = 2.24, 95%CI = 1.32-3.95, P = 0.0037). A higher percentage of revisions were due to infection in robot-assisted LSF (19.0%) than in conventional LSF (9.2%) (P = 0.0408).

Conclusion: Robotic-assisted posterior LSF is independently associated with increased risk of revision surgery, infection, instrumentation complications, and postoperative opioid utilization compared to conventional fusion techniques. Further research is needed to investigate long-term postoperative outcomes following robot-assisted LSF. Spine surgeons should be cautious when considering immediate adoption of this emerging surgical technology.

Level of evidence: 3.

Similar articles

• Surgical Treatment of Patients With Dual Hip and Spinal Degenerative Disease: Effect of Surgical Sequence of Spinal Fusion and Total Hip Arthroplasty on Postoperative Complications.Yang DS, Li NY, Mariorenzi MC, Kleinhenz DT, Cohen EM, Daniels AH.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 May 15;45(10):E587-E593. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003351.PMID: 31809465
• Patients Who Undergo Primary Lumbar Spine Fusion After Recent but Not Remote Total Hip Arthroplasty Are at Increased Risk for Complications, Revision Surgery, and Prolonged Opioid Use.Patel SA, Li NY, Yang DS, Reid DBC, Disilvestro KJ, Babu JM, Kuris EO, Barrett T, Daniels AH.World Neurosurg. 2020 Dec;144:e523-e532. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.08.210. Epub 2020 Sep 3.PMID: 32891851
• Does Timing of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Prior to or After Lumbar Spine Fusion Have an Effect on Dislocation and Revision Rates?Malkani AL, Himschoot KJ, Ong KL, Lau EC, Baykal D, Dimar JR, Glassman SD, Berry DJ.J Arthroplasty. 2019 May;34(5):907-911. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.01.009. Epub 2019 Jan 14.PMID: 30718171
• Pedicle Screw Revision in Robot-Guided, Navigated, and Freehand Thoracolumbar Instrumentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Staartjes VE, Klukowska AM, Schröder ML.World Neurosurg. 2018 Aug;116:433-443.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.05.159. Epub 2018 May 31.PMID: 29859354 Review.
• Comparable dislocation and revision rates for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with subsequent or prior lumbar spinal fusion: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Onggo JR, Nambiar M, Onggo JD, Phan K, Ambikaipalan A, Babazadeh S, Hau R.Eur Spine J. 2020 Oct 26. doi: 10.1007/s00586-020-06635-w. Online ahead of print.PMID: 33104880 Review.

See all similar articles

References

1. Patel V. Future of robotics in spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018; 43:S28doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000002554. – DOI