ArticleGlobal spine journal2023
Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Versus Freehand Pedicle Screw Placement After One-to Three-Level Lumbar Fusion.
Article in Global spine journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Accuracy and Safety Between Robot-Assisted and Conventional Freehand Fluoroscope-Assisted Placement of Pedicle Screws in Thoracolumbar Spine: Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement in spine surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- The Impact of Image-Guided Screw Placement on Unexpected Return to the Operating Room: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 91,285 Patients.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Mitigating radiation in robotic-assisted sacropelvic screw placement using 3D magnetic resonance imaging.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness and evidence gaps of advanced technologies in lumbar spine surgery: a scoping review.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Review
- Long-term outcomes following augmented reality-assisted pedicle screw placement in spinal fusion patients.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes and complications of robotic-assisted spine surgery: using the ExcelsiusGPS system: a single-surgeon case series.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Current Applications and Future Directions of Technologies Used in Adult Deformity Surgery for Personalized Alignment: A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Visuohaptic Feedback in Robotic-Assisted Spine Surgery for Pedicle Screw Placement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Complications Have Not Improved With Newer Generation Robots.Global spine journal · 2025Article
- A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pedicle Screw Placement Techniques Using Intraoperative Conventional, Navigation, Robot-Assisted, and Augmented Reality Guiding Systems.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Robotic-assisted spine surgery-a narrative review.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2024Review
- Article
- A novel method to evaluate the transverse pedicle angles of the lower lumbar vertebrae using digital radiography.PloS one · 2024Article
- Index Surgery Cost of Fluoroscopic Freehand Versus Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement in Lumbar Instrumentation: An Age, Sex, and Approach-Matched Cohort Comparison.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study.
objectivesThe purpose of this study is to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients undergoing one-to three-level lumbar fusion using robotically assisted vs freehand pedicle screw placement.
methodsPatients who underwent either robotically assisted or freehand pedicle screw placement for one-to three-level lumbar fusion surgery from January 1, 2014 to August 31, 2020 at a single academic institution were identified. Propensity score matching was performed based on demographic variables. Clinical and surgical outcomes were compared between groups. Recovery Ratios (RR) and the proportion of patients achieving the minimally clinically important difference (%MCID) were calculated for Oswestry Disability Index, PCS-12, MCS-12, VAS Back, and VAS Leg at 1 year. Surgical outcomes included complication and revision rates.
resultsA total of 262 patients were included in the study (85 robotic and 177 freehand). No significant differences were found in ΔPROM scores, RR, or MCID between patients who underwent robotically assisted vs freehand screw placement. The rates of revision (1.70% freehand vs 1.18% robotic,
conclusionsRobotically assisted pedicle screw placement did not result in significantly improved clinical or surgical outcomes compared to conventional freehand screw placement for patients undergoing one-to three-level lumbar fusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.