Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Cyrille Capel x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Sultan Alsalmi, Cyrille Capel, Louis Chenin, Johann Peltier and Michel Lefranc

OBJECTIVE

Intravertebral augmentation (IVA) is a reliable minimally invasive technique for treating Magerl type A vertebral body fractures. However, poor correction of kyphotic angulation, the risk of cement leakage, and significant exposure to radiation (for the surgeon, the operating room staff, and the patient) remain significant issues. The authors conducted a study to assess the value of robot-assisted IVA (RA-IVA) for thoracolumbar vertebral body fractures.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective, single-center study of patients who had undergone RA-IVA or conventional fluoroscopy-guided IVA (F-IVA) for thoracolumbar vertebral body fractures. Installation and operating times, guidance accuracy, residual local kyphosis, degree of restoration of vertebral body height, incidence of cement leakage, rate of morbidity, length of hospital stay, and radiation-related data were recorded.

RESULTS

Data obtained in 30 patients who underwent RA-IVA were compared with those obtained in 30 patients who underwent F-IVA during the same period (the surgical indications were identical, but the surgeons were different). The mean ± SD installation time in the RA-IVA group (24 ± 7.5 minutes) was significantly shorter (p = 0.005) than that in the F-IVA group (26 ± 8 minutes). The mean operating time for the RA-IVA group (52 ± 11 minutes) was significantly longer (p = 0.026) than that for the F-IVA group (30 ± 11 minutes). All RA-IVAs and F-IVAs were Ravi’s scale grade A (no pedicle breach). The mean degree of residual local kyphosis (4.7° ± 3.15°) and the percentage of vertebral body height restoration (63.6% ± 21.4%) were significantly better after RA-IVA than after F-IVA (8.4° ± 5.4° and 30% ± 34%, respectively). The incidence of cement leakage was significantly lower in the RA-IVA group (p < 0.05). The mean length of hospital stay after surgery was 3.2 days for both groups. No surgery-related complications occurred in either group. With RA-IVA, the mean radiation exposure was 438 ± 147 mGy × cm for the patient and 30 ± 17 mGy for the surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

RA-IVA provided better vertebral body fracture correction than the conventional F-IVA. However, RA-IVA requires more time than F-IVA.

Full access

Michel Lefranc, Cyrille Capel, Anne-Sophie Pruvot-Occean, Anthony Fichten, Christine Desenclos, Patrick Toussaint, Daniel Le Gars and Johann Peltier

OBJECT

Stereotactic biopsy procedures are an everyday part of neurosurgery. The procedure provides an accurate histological diagnosis with the least possible morbidity. Robotic stereotactic biopsy needs to be an accurate, safe, frameless, and rapid technique. This article reports the clinical results of a series of 100 frameless robotic biopsies using a Medtech ROSA device.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively analyzed their first 100 frameless stereotactic biopsies performed with the robotic ROSA device: 84 biopsies were performed by frameless robotic surface registration, 7 were performed by robotic bone fiducial marker registration, and 9 were performed by scalp fiducial marker registration. Intraoperative flat-panel CT scanning was performed concomitantly in 25 cases. The operative details of the robotic biopsies, the diagnostic yield, and mortality and morbidity data observed in this series are reported.

RESULTS

A histological diagnosis was established in 97 patients. No deaths or permanent morbidity related to surgery were observed. Six patients experienced transient neurological worsening. Six cases of bleeding within the lesion or along the biopsy trajectory were observed on postoperative CT scans but were associated with transient clinical symptoms in only 2 cases. Stereotactic surgery was performed with patients in the supine position in 93 cases and in the prone position in 7 cases. The use of fiducial markers was reserved for posterior fossa biopsy via a transcerebellar approach, via an occipital approach, or for pediatric biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

ROSA frameless stereotactic biopsies appear to be accurate and safe robotized frameless procedures.

Restricted access

Sultan Alsalmi, Cyrille Capel, Louis Chenin, Johann Peltier and Michel Lefranc

OBJECTIVE

Intravertebral augmentation (IVA) is a reliable minimally invasive technique for treating Magerl type A vertebral body fractures. However, poor correction of kyphotic angulation, the risk of cement leakage, and significant exposure to radiation (for the surgeon, the operating room staff, and the patient) remain significant issues. The authors conducted a study to assess the value of robot-assisted IVA (RA-IVA) for thoracolumbar vertebral body fractures.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective, single-center study of patients who had undergone RA-IVA or conventional fluoroscopy-guided IVA (F-IVA) for thoracolumbar vertebral body fractures. Installation and operating times, guidance accuracy, residual local kyphosis, degree of restoration of vertebral body height, incidence of cement leakage, rate of morbidity, length of hospital stay, and radiation-related data were recorded.

RESULTS

Data obtained in 30 patients who underwent RA-IVA were compared with those obtained in 30 patients who underwent F-IVA during the same period (the surgical indications were identical, but the surgeons were different). The mean ± SD installation time in the RA-IVA group (24 ± 7.5 minutes) was significantly shorter (p = 0.005) than that in the F-IVA group (26 ± 8 minutes). The mean operating time for the RA-IVA group (52 ± 11 minutes) was significantly longer (p = 0.026) than that for the F-IVA group (30 ± 11 minutes). All RA-IVAs and F-IVAs were Ravi’s scale grade A (no pedicle breach). The mean degree of residual local kyphosis (4.7° ± 3.15°) and the percentage of vertebral body height restoration (63.6% ± 21.4%) were significantly better after RA-IVA than after F-IVA (8.4° ± 5.4° and 30% ± 34%, respectively). The incidence of cement leakage was significantly lower in the RA-IVA group (p < 0.05). The mean length of hospital stay after surgery was 3.2 days for both groups. No surgery-related complications occurred in either group. With RA-IVA, the mean radiation exposure was 438 ± 147 mGy × cm for the patient and 30 ± 17 mGy for the surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

RA-IVA provided better vertebral body fracture correction than the conventional F-IVA. However, RA-IVA requires more time than F-IVA.