Assessment of Proximal Facet Joint Violations in Robotic and Augmented Reality-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement

Study Design: Single-center retrospective cohort study. Objective: The primary objective was to evaluate the incidence of proximal facet joint violation (FJV) in lumbar and sacral pedicle screw placement, comparing robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) versus augmented reality (AR) guidance systems. Secondary objectives examined risk factor assessment across demographic characteristics, surgical variables, and analysis of vertebral level-specific violation patterns. Summary of Background Data: Proximal FJV is a recognized complication of pedicle screw placement, with reported rates ranging from 2% to 42%. Although robotic-assisted techniques are associated with reduced FJV risk, direct comparisons between modern RAN and AR systems remain limited and warrant further investigation. Methods: Postoperative imaging was analyzed for proximal FJV in patients who underwent either RAN (Mazor X) or AR-guided (Xvision) pedicle screw placement. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and FJV rates were compared between groups. Results: Among 175 patients, a total of 350 proximal facet joints were evaluated, with an FJV rate of 5.8% (n = 11) in the RAN group and 9.4% (n = 15) in the AR group. The highest violation rates occurred at L5 (RAN: 13.2%, n=5; AR: 35.3%, n=12), without reaching statistical significance. Most violations were modified Park grade I (RAN: 6.3%, n=9; AR: 4.4%, n=7) or grade II (RAN: 1.6%, n=2; AR: 5.6%, n=8), with no grade III violations observed. Demographic factors showed no significant association with FJV rates. No revision surgeries were required for screw malposition or FJV. Conclusions: RAN demonstrated lower proximal FJV rates compared with AR guidance in lumbar and sacral pedicle screw placement, particularly at L5; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Although demographic factors showed no significant association with FJV occurrence, the absence of severe violations in both cohorts demonstrates the overall safety profile of these navigation systems.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Universität Zürich, ZORA
Published
2026-01-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-284347
Primary Topic
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of Proximal Facet Joint Violations in Robotic and Augmented Reality-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement

Fedan Avrumova, Marco D. Burkhard, Frederik Abel, Jiaqi Zhu et al.
Universität Zürich, ZORA
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
article

Assessment of Proximal Facet Joint Violations in Robotic and Augmented Reality-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement

Fedan Avrumova, Marco D. Burkhard, Frederik Abel, Jiaqi Zhu, Giuseppe Loggia, Franziska C S Altorfer, Darren R. Lebl, Frank P. Cammisa, Mazda Farshad, Andrew Sama
article en

Abstract

Study Design: Single-center retrospective cohort study. Objective: The primary objective was to evaluate the incidence of proximal facet joint violation (FJV) in lumbar and sacral pedicle screw placement, comparing robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) versus augmented reality (AR) guidance systems. Secondary objectives examined risk factor assessment across demographic characteristics, surgical variables, and analysis of vertebral level-specific violation patterns. Summary of Background Data: Proximal FJV is a recognized complication of pedicle screw placement, with reported rates ranging from 2% to 42%. Although robotic-assisted techniques are associated with reduced FJV risk, direct comparisons between modern RAN and AR systems remain limited and warrant further investigation. Methods: Postoperative imaging was analyzed for proximal FJV in patients who underwent either RAN (Mazor X) or AR-guided (Xvision) pedicle screw placement. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and FJV rates were compared between groups. Results: Among 175 patients, a total of 350 proximal facet joints were evaluated, with an FJV rate of 5.8% (n = 11) in the RAN group and 9.4% (n = 15) in the AR group. The highest violation rates occurred at L5 (RAN: 13.2%, n=5; AR: 35.3%, n=12), without reaching statistical significance. Most violations were modified Park grade I (RAN: 6.3%, n=9; AR: 4.4%, n=7) or grade II (RAN: 1.6%, n=2; AR: 5.6%, n=8), with no grade III violations observed. Demographic factors showed no significant association with FJV rates. No revision surgeries were required for screw malposition or FJV. Conclusions: RAN demonstrated lower proximal FJV rates compared with AR guidance in lumbar and sacral pedicle screw placement, particularly at L5; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Although demographic factors showed no significant association with FJV occurrence, the absence of severe violations in both cohorts demonstrates the overall safety profile of these navigation systems.

Universität Zürich, ZORA
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.