Mazor X Stealth Versus O-arm Navigation for Pedicle Screw Insertion

Disorder of Spine Clinical Trial

— RGNV  

Official title:

Fluoro-registered Mazor X Stealth Edition Versus O-arm Navigation: a State of the Art Technology Comparison for Pedicle Screw Insertion

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04353895
• Other study ID #: 2020-00305
• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: April 1, 2021
• Est. completion date: December 31, 2023

Study information

• Verified date: February 2022
• Source: Neuro Orthopedic Center
• Contact: Duccio Boscherini, MD, PhD
• Phone: +41216470525
• Email: d.boscherini[@]lasource.ch
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The investigators would like to investigate the fluoro-registered Mazor X Stealth in terms of pedicle screw accuracy and radiation exposure in comparison with the O-arm and navigation as the institutional gold standard.

Description:

Pedicle screw insertion for spinal fusion is a surgical procedure regularly performed around the world. Surgeons use free-hand, navigation or robotic techniques. The navigation began in 1995 in spine surgery. Surgical navigation systems provide pedicle screw insertion by projecting screw trajectories on a three-dimensional (3D) image acquisition, preoperatively or during the surgical procedure. Laine et al reported better accuracy and safety in pedicle screw insertion using the navigation system. Other authors reported less irradiation with the use of computer-assisted navigation. Robotic guidance was introduced in 2006 and assists the surgeon through a mechanical guidance according to a planning of screw trajectories on 3D imaging. This technique allows stable guidance for pedicle drilling and screw insertion, leading to greater screw positioning in lumbar fusion. Medtronic (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) introduced the Mazor X Stealth in Europa in 2019, including the Mazor robotic device with the navigation technology within the same system. The hypothesis would be a combination of the stability of the robot during screw insertion and the accuracy of the navigation with cumulative benefit from the two techniques. The goal of this study is to compare radiological and clinical results of the use of the new Mazor Stealth with the surgical O-arm navigation during pedicle screw insertion for posterior lumbar fusion.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Recruiting
• Enrollment: 36
• Est. completion date: December 31, 2023
• Est. primary completion date: December 31, 2022
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• adult patients
• who require pedicle screw insertion for vertebral posterior stabilization

Exclusion Criteria:

• children
• participants incapable of judgment
• participants under tutelage
• vertebral fusion indication without pedicle screw implantation
• refusal to participate
• data missing for radiation exposure calculation
• unstable vertebral fracture requiring urgent fixation
• pregnancy
• refusal to participate

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Disorder of Spine
• Spinal Diseases

Intervention

Device:
• Guidance for pedicle screw insertion (Mazor Stealth)
Using imaging devices and navigation for guidance, we perform a posterior vertebral fusion with pedicle screw insertion
• Guidance for pedicle screw insertion (O-arm Navigation)
Using imaging devices and navigation for guidance, we perform a posterior vertebral fusion with pedicle screw insertion

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Switzerland	Neuro Orthopedic Center	Lausanne	VD

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
P. D. Dr. med. Duccio BOSCHERINI

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Switzerland, 

References & Publications (13)

Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE. Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1990 Jan;15(1):11-4. — View Citation

Härtl R, Lam KS, Wang J, Korge A, Kandziora F, Audigé L. Worldwide survey on the use of navigation in spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2013 Jan;79(1):162-72. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2012.03.011. Epub 2012 Mar 30. — View Citation

Heary RF, Bono CM, Black M. Thoracic pedicle screws: postoperative computerized tomography scanning assessment. J Neurosurg. 2004 Apr;100(4 Suppl Spine):325-31. — View Citation

Laine T, Lund T, Ylikoski M, Lohikoski J, Schlenzka D. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion with and without computer assistance: a randomised controlled clinical study in 100 consecutive patients. Eur Spine J. 2000 Jun;9(3):235-40. — View Citation

Lieberman IH, Togawa D, Kayanja MM, Reinhardt MK, Friedlander A, Knoller N, Benzel EC. Bone-mounted miniature robotic guidance for pedicle screw and translaminar facet screw placement: Part I--Technical development and a test case result. Neurosurgery. 2006 Sep;59(3):641-50; discussion 641-50. — View Citation

Nolte LP, Zamorano L, Visarius H, Berlemann U, Langlotz F, Arm E, Schwarzenbach O. Clinical evaluation of a system for precision enhancement in spine surgery. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1995 Sep;10(6):293-303. — View Citation

Nuclear Energy Agency Forum on Stakeholder ConfidenceChilton Seminar: Roger Cox -'Risks from low doses of low-LET radiation - the US National Academy of Sciences BEIR VII report'SRP Meeting on Source ManagementScientific Symposium to Mark the Past and Future Achievements of Richard Doll. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2006;26(1):119-123

Schröder ML, Staartjes VE. Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus. 2017 May;42(5):E12. doi: 10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS16534. — View Citation

Servomaa A, Tapiovaara M. Organ dose calculation in medical x ray examinations by the program PCXMC. Radiation protection dosimetry. 1998 Nov 1;80(1-3):213-9

Staartjes VE, Klukowska AM, Schröder ML. Pedicle Screw Revision in Robot-Guided, Navigated, and Freehand Thoracolumbar Instrumentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2018 Aug;116:433-443.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.05.159. Epub 2018 May 31. Review. — View Citation

Staartjes VE, Molliqaj G, van Kampen PM, Eversdijk HAJ, Amelot A, Bettag C, Wolfs JFC, Urbanski S, Hedayat F, Schneekloth CG, Abu Saris M, Lefranc M, Peltier J, Boscherini D, Fiss I, Schatlo B, Rohde V, Ryang YM, Krieg SM, Meyer B, Kögl N, Girod PP, Thomé C, Twisk JWR, Tessitore E, Schröder ML. The European Robotic Spinal Instrumentation (EUROSPIN) study: protocol for a multicentre prospective observational study of pedicle screw revision surgery after robot-guided, navigated and freehand thoracolumbar spinal fusion. BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 8;9(9):e030389. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030389. — View Citation

The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2-4):1-332. — View Citation

Togawa D, Kayanja MM, Reinhardt MK, Shoham M, Balter A, Friedlander A, Knoller N, Benzel EC, Lieberman IH. Bone-mounted miniature robotic guidance for pedicle screw and translaminar facet screw placement: part 2--Evaluation of system accuracy. Neurosurgery. 2007 Feb;60(2 Suppl 1):ONS129-39; discussion ONS139. — View Citation

* Note: There are 13 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Pedicle screw accuracy	Usinge the Heary classification for thoracic screws and the Gertzbein classification for lumbar screws	Intraoperative
Secondary	Radiation exposure	Effective dose calculated with the PCXMC software for 2D (from dose area product) and with the ICRP 103 recommandations for 3D (from dose length product)	Intraoperative

External Links

•   [Internet]. Medtronic.com. 2019 [cited 15 January 2020].