Bassel G. Diebo, Navraj Sagoo, Bhaveen H. Kapadia, Waleed Ahmad, Peter G. Passias, Sara Naessig, Lara Passfall, Hesham Saleh, Shaleen N. Vira, Nicholas Kummer, Oscar Krol, Karan S. Patel, Laviel Fernandez, Katherine E. Pierce, and Rivka C. Ihejirika-Lomedico
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Robot-assisted surgical techniques are being increasingly implemented to increase surgeon accuracy and stamina; however, further investigation of the introductory phase of robot technology on surgical outcomes remains warranted. PURPOSE To assess complication rates of robotic surgery in elective spine patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE A total of 10,501 elective spine patients. OUTCOME MEASURES intra- and postoperative complication rates; reoperation rate. METHODS Patients ≥18 years undergoing elective spine surgery with BL to 2-year follow-up were isolated in a single-center spine database. Patients were grouped by absence or presence of robotic assistance during operation. Univariate analyses identified differences in perioperative outcomes [op time, estimated blood loss, length of stay], rates of intraoperative [durotomy, massive blood loss, neurologic deficit] and postoperative complications [cardiopulmonary, neurologic, GI, GU, infection, mechanical], and reoperation rates by 2Y postop]. Regression analysis assessed the impact of robotic surgery on outcomes. RESULTS A total of 10,501 patients met inclusion criteria (57years, 49% F, 29.0kg/m2) and underwent elective spine surgery (mean levels fused: 3.0±3.3, EBL: 375mL, op time: 206 min, mean UIV: T9, mean LIV: T12). Of these patients, 424 (4.0%) underwent operation with robotic assistance. Compared to a general cohort of elective spine surgery patients, robotic-assisted surgeries had lower levels fused (1.99 vs 3.07), longer op time (301 vs 202min), and longer LOS (4.2 vs 3.2 days); all p 0.05). Robotic and non-robotic patients did not differ in rates of intraoperative complications, including durotomy, massive blood loss, and delayed extubation (all p>0.05). Robotic patients had higher rates of postop ileus (12% vs 7%, p=0.04), but did not differ in overall postop complications, surgical site infection, cardiopulmonary, mechanical, or neurologic complication. Robotic patients had higher rate of reoperation (6% vs 4%, p=0.004). Regression analysis controlling for revision status, decompression, and approach found that robotic surgery patients had lower odds of delayed extubation (OR: 0.155 p=0.025). Robotic surgery did affect the odds for other complications, including durotomy, neurologic, cardiopulmonary, mechanical, infection, and reoperation (all p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS Robotic and non-robotic procedures for elective spine patients were equally as safe in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications with equivocal functional outcomes up to 2-years postoperatively. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.