Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38358573›Full record

SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2024

Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-assisted cortical bone trajectory screw instrumentation in spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xu Wang, Hao-Xuan Li, Qing-San Zhu, Yu-Hang Zhu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Robotic-assisted fixation with cortical bone trajectory versus conventional pedicle trajectory for short-segment lumbar decompression and fusion surgery: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.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 · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xu WangDepartment of Spine Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, No.126 Xiantai Street, Changchun, Jilin, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0142-8469
Hao-Xuan LiDepartment of Spine Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, No.126 Xiantai Street, Changchun, Jilin, China.
Qing-San ZhuDepartment of Spine Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, No.126 Xiantai Street, Changchun, Jilin, China. zhuqs@jlu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9403-832X
Yu-Hang ZhuDepartment of Spine Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, No.126 Xiantai Street, Changchun, Jilin, China. yhz@jlu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0866-8588
Union Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robot-assisted (RA) technology has been shown to be a safe aid in spine surgery, this meta-analysis aims to compare surgical parameters and clinical indexes between robot-assisted cortical bone trajectory (CBT) and fluoroscopy-assisted (FA) cortical bone trajectory in spinal surgery. We searched databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The study selection process was guided by the PICOS (Patient/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study Design) strategy. The risk of bias in non-randomized comparative studies was assessed using the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. We performed this meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark), and the level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Six articles involving 371 patients and 1535 screws were included in this meta-analysis. RA-CBT outperformed FA-CBT in terms of various parameters, such as accuracy of pedicle screw position (both Gertzbein-Robbins scale and Ding scale), avoidance of superior facet joint violation (FJV), and reduction of neurological injury. Our meta-analysis offered a thorough evaluation of the efficacy and safety of RA-CBT in spinal surgery. The findings revealed that RA-CBT produced statistically significant results in terms of pedicle screw position accuracy and superior facet joint violation prevention. In terms of surgical parameters and clinical indexes, future research and clinical practice should investigate the efficacy of RA-CBT further. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023466280).

Indexed as

Pedicle ScrewsRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresCortical BoneFluoroscopyHumansCortical bone trajectoryMeta-analysisRobot-assistedSpinal surgery

Identifiers

PMID38358573
OpenAlexW4391839948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.