ArticleFrontiers in surgery2023
Robot and working tube-assisted invasion-controlled surgery for spinal metastases.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maximal feasible resection versus hybrid therapy in spinal metastases: an updated narrative review.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Review
- [Preliminary comparative study of spinal robot-assisted pedicle screw placement using different surgical approaches].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to highlight the use of robots in surgery and that of tube-assisted minimally invasive surgery for spinal metastases, as well as elaborate on the concept of invasion-controlled surgery (ICS). Summary of background: Many patients with spinal metastasis cancer cannot afford serious complications when undergoing traditional open surgery because of their poor physical condition. Robots and minimally invasive technology have been introduced into the field of spine surgery and they have shown significant advantages. Methods: Six patients who underwent robot and working tube-assisted ICS for spinal metastases. Relevant demographic, medical, surgical, and postoperative data were collected from medical records and analyzed. Results: Mean operative time was 3.8 h and the mean length of the surgical incision was 4.9 cm. The mean estimated blood loss was 400 ml. The mean bedtime and hospital length of stay were 3.2 days and 6.5 days, respectively. No obvious complications were reported during treatment. The mean accuracy of screw placement was 98%. The mean time for further system treatment after surgery was 5.8 days. All patients experienced significant pain relief. The mean preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) was 7.83 points. The mean VAS at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month after surgery were 2.83, 1.83, and 1.17 points, respectively. Frankel grade was improved in five of six patients. One patient preoperatively with Frankel grade D was the same postoperatively. Conclusion: The concept of ICS is suitable for patients with spinal metastases. Robot and working tube-assisted ICS for spinal metastases is one of the safest and most effective treatment methods.
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.