Expanding the Spectrum of Robotic Assistance in Cranial Neurosurgery.
Endoport neurosurgery
Midfacial distraction
Robotic neuroendoscopy
Robotic neurosurgery
Robotic stereotaxy
Journal
Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)
ISSN: 2332-4260
Titre abrégé: Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101635417
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 08 2019
01 08 2019
Historique:
received:
09
11
2017
accepted:
24
07
2018
pubmed:
12
9
2018
medline:
29
9
2020
entrez:
12
9
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Robotic automation and haptic guidance have multiple applications in neurosurgery. To define the spectrum of cranial procedures potentially benefiting from robotic assistance in a university hospital neurosurgical practice setting. Procedures utilizing robotic assistance during a 24-mo period were retrospectively analyzed and classified as stereotactic or endoscopic based on the mode utilized in the ROSA system (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana). Machine log file data were retrospectively analyzed to compare registration accuracy using 3 different methods: (1) facial laser scanning, (2) bone fiduciary, or (3) skin fiduciary. Two hundred seven cranial neurosurgical procedures utilizing robotic assistance were performed in a 24-mo period. One hundred forty-five procedures utilizing the stereotactic mode included 33% stereotactic biopsy, 31% Stereo-EEG electrode insertion, 20% cranial navigation, 7% stereotactic catheter placement, 6% craniofacial stereotactic wire placement, 2% deep brain stimulation lead placement, and 1% stereotactic radiofrequency ablation. Sixty-two procedures utilizing the haptic endoscope guidance mode consisted of 48% transnasal endoscopic, 29% ventriculoscopic, and 23% endoport tubular access. Statistically significant differences in registration accuracies were observed with 0.521 ± 0.135 mm (n = 132) for facial laser scanning, 1.026 ± 0.398 mm for bone fiduciary (n = 22), and 1.750 ± 0.967 mm for skin fiduciary (n = 30; ANOVA, P < .001). The combination of accurate, automated stereotaxy with image and haptic guidance can be applied to a wide range of cranial neurosurgical procedures. The facial laser scanning method offered the best registration accuracy for the ROSA system based on our retrospective analysis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Robotic automation and haptic guidance have multiple applications in neurosurgery.
OBJECTIVE
To define the spectrum of cranial procedures potentially benefiting from robotic assistance in a university hospital neurosurgical practice setting.
METHODS
Procedures utilizing robotic assistance during a 24-mo period were retrospectively analyzed and classified as stereotactic or endoscopic based on the mode utilized in the ROSA system (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana). Machine log file data were retrospectively analyzed to compare registration accuracy using 3 different methods: (1) facial laser scanning, (2) bone fiduciary, or (3) skin fiduciary.
RESULTS
Two hundred seven cranial neurosurgical procedures utilizing robotic assistance were performed in a 24-mo period. One hundred forty-five procedures utilizing the stereotactic mode included 33% stereotactic biopsy, 31% Stereo-EEG electrode insertion, 20% cranial navigation, 7% stereotactic catheter placement, 6% craniofacial stereotactic wire placement, 2% deep brain stimulation lead placement, and 1% stereotactic radiofrequency ablation. Sixty-two procedures utilizing the haptic endoscope guidance mode consisted of 48% transnasal endoscopic, 29% ventriculoscopic, and 23% endoport tubular access. Statistically significant differences in registration accuracies were observed with 0.521 ± 0.135 mm (n = 132) for facial laser scanning, 1.026 ± 0.398 mm for bone fiduciary (n = 22), and 1.750 ± 0.967 mm for skin fiduciary (n = 30; ANOVA, P < .001).
CONCLUSION
The combination of accurate, automated stereotaxy with image and haptic guidance can be applied to a wide range of cranial neurosurgical procedures. The facial laser scanning method offered the best registration accuracy for the ROSA system based on our retrospective analysis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30203040
pii: 5092714
doi: 10.1093/ons/opy229
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
164-173Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.