SynthesisNeurosurgical review2023
Robot-assisted vs. manually guided stereoelectroencephalography for refractory epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robot-assisted versus manually guided stereotactic biopsy for intracranial lesions - a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2024Pooled it
- Perioperative adverse events and device malfunctions associated with ROSA cranial stereotactic robotic surgery a descriptive analysis of FDA MAUDE reports from 2016 to 2026.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic Arm Alignment System for Electrode Implantation in Invasive Epilepsy Monitoring: Clinical Experience and Accuracy in a Consecutive Patient Series with Comparison to the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Epilepsy: Molecular Pathogenesis and Emerging Therapies.MedComm · 2026Review
- Modern Aspects of Invasive Epilepsy Monitoring: Utility for Seizure Localization and Therapeutic Decision-Making.Pediatric neurosurgery · 2026Review
- The Value of SINO Robot and Angio Render Technology for Stereoelectroencephalography Electrode Implantation in Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery · 2025Article
- SEEG in 2025: progress and pending challenges in stereotaxy methods, biomarkers and radiofrequency thermocoagulation.Current opinion in neurology · 2025Review
- Advancements in Surgical Therapies for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Paradigm Shift towards Precision Care.Neurology and therapy · 2025Review
- Stereoelectroencephalography for drug resistant epilepsy: precision and complications in stepwise improvement of frameless implantation.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Clinical Applicability and Safety of Conventional Frame-Based Stereotactic Techniques for Stereoelectroencephalography.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2024Article
- Early case series with placement of NeuroOne Evo stereoelectroencephalography depth electrodes and review of other Food and Drug Administration-approved products.Surgical neurology international · 2024Article
- Implantation accuracy of novel polyimide stereotactic electroencephalographic depth electrodes-a human cadaveric study.Frontiers in medical technology · 2024Article
- Real-time display of intracranial subdural electrodes and the brain surface during an electrode implantation procedure using permeable film.Surgical neurology international · 2024Article
- Review
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
Robotic assistance has improved electrode implantation precision in stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) for refractory epilepsy patients. We sought to assess the relative safety of the robotic-assisted (RA) procedure compared to the traditional hand-guided one. A systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane was performed for studies directly comparing robot-assisted vs. manually guided SEEG to treat refractory epilepsy. The primary outcomes included target point error (TPE), entry point error (EPE), time of implantation of each electrode, operative time, postoperative intracranial hemorrhage, infection, and neurologic deficit. We included 427 patients from 11 studies, of whom 232 (54.3%) underwent robot-assisted surgery and 196 (45.7%) underwent manually guided surgery. The primary endpoint, TPE, was not statistically significant (MD 0.04 mm; 95% CI - 0.21, - 0.29; p = 0.76). Nonetheless, EPE was significantly lower in the intervention group (MD - 0.57 mm; 95% CI - 1.08; - 0.06; p = 0.03). Total operative time was significantly lower in the RA group (MD - 23.66 min; 95% CI - 32.01, - 15.31; p < 0.00001), as well as the individual time of implantation of each electrode (MD - 3.35 min; 95% CI - 3.68, - 3.03; p < 0.00001). Postoperative intracranial hemorrhage did not differ between groups: robotic (9/145; 6.2%) vs. manual (8/139; 5.7%) (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.40-2.34; p = 0.94). There was no statistically relevant difference in infection (p = 0.4) and postoperative neurological deficit (p = 0.47) incidence between the two groups. In this analysis, there is a potential relevance in the RA procedure when comparing the traditional one, since operative time, time of implantation of each electrode, and EPE were significantly lower in the robotic group. More research is needed to corroborate the superiority of this novel technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37133774What 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.