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
Jos W R Twisk,
Claudius Thomé,
Bernhard Meyer,
Victor E Staartjes,
Granit Molliqaj,
Paulien M van Kampen,
Hubert A J Eversdijk,
Aymeric Amelot,
Christoph Bettag,
Jasper F C Wolfs,
Sophie Urbanski,
Farman Hedayat,
Carsten G Schneekloth,
Mike Abu Saris,
Michel Lefranc,
Johann Peltier,
Duccio Boscherini,
Ingo Fiss,
Bawarjan Schatlo,
Veit Rohde,
Yu-Mi Ryang,
Sandro M Krieg,
Nikolaus Kögl,
Pierre-Pascal Girod,
Enrico Tessitore,
Marc L Schröder
Affiliations
Jos W R Twisk
21 Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Claudius Thomé
16 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
Bernhard Meyer
2Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
Victor E Staartjes
3 Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Neurosurgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Granit Molliqaj
Division of Neurosurgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
Paulien M van Kampen
5 Department of Epidemiology, Bergman Clinics Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Hubert A J Eversdijk
1 Department of Neurosurgery, Bergman Clinics Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Aymeric Amelot
6 Department of Neurosurgery, La Pitié Salpétrière Hospital, Paris, France
Christoph Bettag
7 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center, Georg August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, Göttingen, Germany
Jasper F C Wolfs
1 Department of Neurosurgery, Bergman Clinics Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Sophie Urbanski
9 Center for Spinal Surgery and Pain Therapy, Ortho-Klinik Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
Farman Hedayat
9 Center for Spinal Surgery and Pain Therapy, Ortho-Klinik Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
Carsten G Schneekloth
10 Department of Spinal Surgery, St. Josef Brothers Hospital, Paderborn, Germany
Mike Abu Saris
11 Department of Neurosurgery, Martini Hospital, Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
Michel Lefranc
12 Department of Neurosurgery, Amiens University Hospital, Amiens, Picardie, France
Johann Peltier
12 Department of Neurosurgery, Amiens University Hospital, Amiens, Picardie, France
Duccio Boscherini
Neuro Orthopedic Center, La Source College of Health, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland
Ingo Fiss
7 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center, Georg August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, Göttingen, Germany
Bawarjan Schatlo
7 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center, Georg August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, Göttingen, Germany
Veit Rohde
7 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center, Georg August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, Göttingen, Germany
Yu-Mi Ryang
14 Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
Sandro M Krieg
Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
Nikolaus Kögl
16 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
Pierre-Pascal Girod
16 Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
Enrico Tessitore
Division of Neurosurgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
Marc L Schröder
1 Department of Neurosurgery, Bergman Clinics Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Introduction Robotic guidance (RG) and computer-assisted navigation (NV) have seen increased adoption in instrumented spine surgery over the last decade. Although there exists some evidence that these techniques increase radiological pedicle screw accuracy compared with conventional freehand (FH) surgery, this may not directly translate to any tangible clinical benefits, especially considering the relatively high inherent costs. As a non-randomised, expertise-based study, the European Robotic Spinal Instrumentation Study aims to create prospective multicentre evidence on the potential comparative clinical benefits of RG, NV and FH in a real-world setting.Methods and analysis Patients are allocated in a non-randomised, non-blinded fashion to the RG, NV or FH arms. Adult patients that are to undergo thoracolumbar pedicle screw instrumentation for degenerative pathologies, infections, vertebral tumours or fractures are considered for inclusion. Deformity correction and surgery at more than five levels represent exclusion criteria. Follow-up takes place at 6 weeks, as well as 12 and 24 months. The primary endpoint is defined as the time to revision surgery for a malpositioned or loosened pedicle screw within the first postoperative year. Secondary endpoints include patient-reported back and leg pain, as well as Oswestry Disability Index and EuroQOL 5-dimension questionnaires. Use of analgesic medication and work status are recorded. The primary analysis, conducted on the 12-month data, is carried out according to the intention-to-treat principle. The primary endpoint is analysed using crude and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Patient-reported outcomes are analysed using baseline-adjusted linear mixed models. The study is monitored according to a prespecified monitoring plan.Ethics and dissemination The study protocol is approved by the appropriate national and local authorities. Written informed consent is obtained from all participants. The final results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration number Clinical Trials.gov registry NCT03398915; Pre-results, recruiting stage.