ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparison of the S8 navigation system and the TINAVI orthopaedic robot in the treatment of upper cervical instability.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy and safety of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in the management of cervical spine disorders.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Intelligence Architectures and Machine Learning Applications in Contemporary Spine Care.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Virtual reality-augmented differentiable simulations for digital twin applications in surgical planning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- S8 Navigation system combined with an ultrasonic osteotome for three-dimensional real-time dynamic visualization decompression to reduce postoperative neurological deterioration in thoracic ossification of the ligamentum flavum.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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The objective is to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the S8 navigation system and the Tinavi orthopaedic surgery robot in the treatment of upper cervical instability. The research methods adopted are as follows. The clinical data of patients with upper cervical instability who underwent surgery from May 2021 to December 2021 were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into a navigation group (assisted by the S8 navigation system) and a tinavi group (assisted by the Tinavi robot) according to the auxiliary system used. Computed tomography and digital radiography were performed after the operation. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was evaluated using the criteria put forward by Rampersaud. Degree of facet joint violation, visual analogue scale score, neck disability index and Japanese orthopaedic association score were recorded and assessed during follow-up examinations in both groups. Record two groups of surgery-related indicators. Record the complications of the two groups. A total of 50 patients were included. 21 patients in the navigation group and 29 in the tinavi group. The results of the study are as follows. The average follow-up time was 12.1 months. There was no significant difference in nail placement accuracy between the navigation and tinavi groups (P > 0.05); however, the navigation group had a significantly higher rate of facet joint violation than that of tinavi group (P < 0.05), and the screws were placed closer to the anterior cortex (P < 0.05). Significantly more intraoperative fluoroscopies were performed in the tinavi group than in the navigation group, and the operation time was significantly longer in the tinavi group than in the navigation group (P < 0.05). The time of single nail implantation, intraoperative blood loss and incision length in navigation group were significantly longer than those in tinavi group. There were no statistically significant differences in other indicators between the two groups (P > 0.05). We come to the following conclusion. The Stealth Station S8 navigation system (Medtronic, USA), which also uses an optical tracking system, and the Tinavi Orthopedic robot have shown the same high accuracy and satisfactory clinical results in the treatment of upper cervical instability. Although the S8 navigation system still has many limitations, it still has good application prospects and is a new tool for spine surgery.
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.