ArticleBMC surgery2022
Initial single surgeon evaluation comparing C-arm fluoroscopy with the Cirq robotic assistance device for instrumentation of the thoracolumbar spine.
Article in BMC surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic-Assisted Spinal Instrumentation from C1 to S1 Experience of a UK Neurosurgical Tertiary Referral Centre.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted spinal surgery: technological maturity, clinical evidence, and future directions.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2026Review
- Robotic-Guided Spine Surgery: Implementation of a System in Routine Clinical Practice-An Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A surgeon-controlled mode of robotic assistance with posterolateral approach helps achieve highly medialized cervical pedicle screw placement to avoid vertebral artery injury.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 · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare our experience with pedicle screw insertion of the thoracolumbar spine utilizing the Cirq robot assistance device compared with traditional paradigm using fluoroscopy.
methodsWe prospectively collected data of patients undergoing pedicle screw instrumentation in the thoracolumbar spine performed by a single surgeon at three different centers. One center took delivery of the Cirq robotic assistance device. Remaining two centers used C-arm fluoroscopy. Demographic information, diagnosis, total OR time, intraoperative complications, unexpected return to the operating room, and hospital readmissions within 90 days was compared between the two cohorts.
resultsA total of 166 screws were placed during the study period. Forty percent were placed using the Cirq. Two thirds the patients had traumatic diagnoses with remaining degenerative spine disease. There were no misplaced pedicle screws in either group. While total OR time was longer in the Cirq cohort by 123 min (p = 0.04), actual procedural time was not statistically different (p = 0.11). Nonetheless there were also more hospital readmissions in the Cirq cohort compared with the C arm group (p = 0.04).
conclusionsThoracolumbar screws inserted using C-arm fluoroscopy utilize less total operating room time with similar accuracy compared with the Cirq robotic assistance device. Further studies are warranted.
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.