The value of
Navigated MIS

The combination of Navigated technologies with MIS spinal solution offer great technical and clinical advantages for the surgeons, the hospital and the patient.

For the surgeon

Streamlined

surgical workflow to allow for more treatment options

Minimal

to no radiation exposure²

92%

reduction in screw misplacement^1-5

For the hospital

10%

reduction in hospital costs^{9, 10}

15-64%

reduction in patient hospital stay with MIS (vs open)⁹

60%

less risk of medical complications with MIS⁹

For the patient

1 in 20

patients could avoid revision surgery⁸

3.5 days

faster postoperative recovery with MIS surgery (compated to open surgery)⁹

No patient

needed revision surgery due to screw misplacement

"With this solution you can navigate your cage, place it exactly where you want, without using any fluoroscopy and this means faster surgery, more efficient surgery, less radiation exposure for the surgeon and the patients"*

Dr. Scarone
Clinica Santa Chiara
Locarno, Switzerland

"The first thing is that you add a lot of safety by performing a based navigated procedure. The 3D visualization of instruments and implants helps you a lot, during the whole procedure to increase your safety and not breaching some wall of the vertebra or the pedicle”

Prof. Patrick Strube
Universitätsklinikum Jena
Eisenberg, Germany

Listen to Mr Morris, Dr. Bobinski & Dr. Niemeyer on the benefits of Navigating spinal procedure

For all references, download the navigation and MIS value summaries

pdf Minimally invasive fusion technique in the treatment of low back pain: MAST™ value summary (.pdf)

3.2MB

pdf O-arm™ intraoperative imaging and StealthStation™ surgical navigation (.pdf)

1.3MB

Contact us if you would like one of our representatives reach out to you with more information regarding MIS spinal solutions

*Indicates Required Field

Please select at least one option below:*

I would like to be contacted by a Medtronic representative

Your information will be processed and protected in accordance with our privacy statement

Selecting “no” to marketing emails above will not affect your other email selections, and a Medtronic representative will still reach out via email, if selected. Your personal data will used to manage your relationship with Medtronic, and, if you consent, to provide you with relevant email updates based on your user preferences. You can opt-out of receiving such emails at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in the relevant email. Medtronic may use pixels and other technologies in emails to gather statistics around email opening and clicks, to help us improve our communications and to provide you with relevant content. For more information, see the Medtronic privacy notice.

You can always change your preferences or update your personal details by visiting the Preference center.

See the Preference center

^{* The data and content included in this presentation express only the clinical perspective of the presenter. They are completely independent and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Medtronic}

Silbermann J, Riese F, Allam Y, Reichert T, Koeppert H, Gutberlet M. Computer tomography assessment of pedicle screw placement in lumbar and sacral spine: comparison between free-hand and O-arm based navigation techniques. Eur Spine J 2011;20(6):875-81.

Shin MH, Ryu KS, Park CK. Accuracy and safety in pedicle screw placement in the thoracic and lumbar spines: Comparison study between conventional C-arm fluoroscopy and navigation coupled with O-arm (registered trademark) guided methods. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2012;52(3):204-9.

Allam Y, Silbermann J, Riese F, Greiner-Perth R. Computer tomography assessment of pedicle screw placement in thoracic spine: comparison between free hand and a generic 3D-based navigation techniques. Eur Spine J 2013;22:648-53.

⁴

Shin, M.-H., Hur, J.-W., Ryu, K.-S., & Park, C.-K. Prospective Comparison Study between the Fluoroscopy-guided and Navigation Coupled with O-arm -Guided Pedicle Screw Placement in the Thoracic and Lumbosacral Spines. Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques. 2015. 28(6), E347–E351.

⁵

Verma, S. K., Singh, P. K., Agrawal, D., Sinha, S., Gupta, D., Satyarthee, G. D., & Sharma, B. S. (2016). O-arm with navigation versus C-arm: a review of screw placement over 3 years at a major trauma center. British Journal of Neurosurgery, 1–4.

⁶

Tajsic T, Patel K, Farmer R, Mannion RJ, Trivedi RA. Spinal navigation for minimally invasive thoracic and lumbosacral spine fixation: implications for radiation exposure, operative time, and accuracy of pedicle screw placement. Eur Spine J. 2018 Aug ;27(8) :1918-24

⁷

Van de Kelft E, Costa F, Van der Planken D, Schils F. A prospective multicenter registry on the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral levels with the use of the O-arm imaging system and StealthStation Navigation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Dec 1 ;37(25) :E1580-7.

⁸

Dea, N., Fisher, C. G., Batke, J., Strelzow, J., Mendelsohn, D., Paquette, S. J., … Street, J. T. (2016). Economic evaluation comparing intraoperative cone beamCT-based navigation and conventional fluoroscopy for the placement of spinal pedicle screws: A patient-level data cost-effectiveness analysis. Spine Journal, 16(1), 23–31.

⁹

Goldstein, C.L., et al., Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: Meta-analysis and systematic review. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 2016. 24(3): p416-427. 10. Vertuani, S. et al., A cost-effectiveness analysis of minimally invasive versus open surgery techniques for lumbar spinal fusion in Italy and the United Kingdom. Value Health, 2015. 18(6): p. 810-816.

This material should not be considered the exclusive source of information, it does not replace or supersede information contained in the device manual(s). Please note that the intended use of a product may vary depending on geographical approvals.

See the device manual(s) for detailed information regarding the intended use, the implant procedure, indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, and potential adverse events.

For a MRI compatible device(s), consult the MRI information in the device manual(s) before performing a MRI. If a device is eligible for eIFU usage, instructions for use can be found at Medtronic’s website manuals.medtronic.com.

Manuals can be viewed using a current version of any major internet browser.

For best results, use Adobe Acrobat® Reader with the browser. Medtronic products placed on European markets bear the CE mark and the UKCA mark (if applicable). For any further information, contact your local Medtronic representative and/or consult Medtronic’s websites.

The value of Navigated MIS