Decreased olfactory discrimination is associated with impulsivity in healthy volunteers

In clinical populations, olfactory abilities parallel executive function, implicating shared neuroanatomical substrates within the ventral prefrontal cortex. In healthy individuals, the relationship between olfaction and personality traits or certain cognitive and behavioural characteristics remains unexplored. We therefore tested if olfactory function is associated with trait and behavioural impulsivity in nonclinical individuals. Eighty-three healthy volunteers (50 females) underwent quantitative assessment of olfactory function (odour detection threshold, discrimination, and identifcation). Each participant was rated for trait impulsivity index using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale and performed a battery of tasks to assess behavioural impulsivity (Stop Signal Task, SST; Information Sampling Task, IST; Delay Discounting). Lower odour discrimination predicted high ratings in non-planning impulsivity (Barratt Non-Planning impulsivity subscale); both, lower odour discrimination and detection threshold predicted low inhibitory control (SST; increased motor impulsivity). These fndings extend clinical observations to support the hypothesis that defcits in olfactory ability are linked to impulsive tendencies within the healthy population. In particular, the relationship between olfactory abilities and behavioural inhibitory control (in the SST) reinforces evidence for functional overlap between neural networks involved in both processes. These fndings may usefully inform the stratifcation of people at risk of impulse-control-related problems and support planning early clinical interventions

Clinical acceptance and accuracy assessment of spinal implants guided with SpineAssist surgical robot: retrospective study.

Retrospective, multicenter study of robotically-guided spinal implant insertions. Clinical acceptance of the implants was assessed by intraoperative radiograph, and when available, postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans were used to determine placement accuracy.To verify the clinical acceptance and accuracy of robotically-guided spinal implants and compare to those of unguided free-hand procedures.SpineAssist surgical robot has been used to guide implants and guide-wires to predefined locations in the spine. SpineAssist which, to the best of the authors' knowledge, is currently the sole robot providing surgical assistance in positioning tools in the spine, guided over 840 cases in 14 hospitals, between June 2005 and June 2009.Clinical acceptance of 3271 pedicle screws and guide-wires inserted in 635 reported cases was assessed by intraoperative fluoroscopy, where placement accuracy of 646 pedicle screws inserted in 139 patients was measured using postoperative CT scans.Screw placements were found to be clinically acceptable in 98% of the cases when intraoperatively assessed by fluoroscopic images. Measurements derived from postoperative CT scans demonstrated that 98.3% of the screws fell within the safe zone, where 89.3% were completely within the pedicle and 9% breached the pedicle by up to 2 mm. The remaining 1.4% of the screws breached between 2 and 4 mm, while only 2 screws (0.3%) deviated by more than 4 mm from the pedicle wall. Neurologic deficits were observed in 4 cases yet, following revisions, no permanent nerve damage was encountered, in contrast to the 0.6% to 5% of neurologic damage reported in the literature.SpineAssist offers enhanced performance in spinal surgery when compared to free-hand surgeries, by increasing placement accuracy and reducing neurologic risks. In addition, 49% of the cases reported herein used a percutaneous approach, highlighting the contribution of SpineAssist in procedures without anatomic landmarks

Robot-assisted spine surgery: feasibility study through a prospective case-matched analysis

International audiencePURPOSE:While image guidance and neuronavigation have enabled a more accurate placement of pedicle implants, they can inconvenience the surgeon. Robot-assisted placement of pedicle screws appears to overcome these disadvantages. However, recent data concerning the superiority of currently available robots in assisting spinal surgeons are conflicting. The aim of our study was to evaluate the percentage of accurately placed pedicle screws, inserted using a new robotic-guidance system.METHOD:20 Patients were operated on successively by the same surgeon using robotic assistance (ROSA™, Medtech) (Rosa group 10 patients, n = 40 screws) or by the freehand conventional technique (Freehand group 10 patients, n = 50 screws). Patient characteristics as well as the duration of the operation and of exposure to X rays were recorded.RESULTS:The mean age of patients in each group (RG and FHG) was 63 years. Mean BMI and operating time among the RG and FHG were, respectively, 26 and 27 kg/m(2), and 187 and 119 min. Accurate placement of the implant (score A and B of the Gertzbein Robbins classification) was achieved in 97.3% of patients in the RG (n = 36) and in 92% of those in the FHG (n = 50). Four implants in the RG were placed manually following failed robotic assistance.CONCLUSION:We report a higher rate of precision with robotic as compared to the FH technique. Providing assistance by permanently monitoring the patient's movements, this image-guided tool helps more accurately pinpoint the pedicle entry point and control the trajectory. Limitations of the study include its small sized and non-randomized sample. Nevertheless, these preliminary results are encouraging for the development of new robotic techniques for spinal surgery