ArticleFrontiers in surgery2024
Analysis of the therapeutic efficacy of robot-assisted percutaneous screw fixation in the minimally invasive treatment of pelvic fractures.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robot-assisted percutaneous pelvic channel screw placement for unstable pelvic ring injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis with narrative technical comparison of multi-platform differences.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- How Can Technology Improve Acetabular and Pelvic Fractures Management in the Operating Room? A Systematic Review.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comprehensive clinical outcomes of TiRobot-assisted minimally invasive surgery for pelvic fractures: a meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robot-assisted closed reduction and navigated fixation for pelvic ring injuries: a focused narrative review of a reduction-fixation-audit framework.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the therapeutic efficacy of robot-assisted and manual screw placement techniques for the treatment of pelvic fractures. Methods: This study included patients with pelvic fractures admitted to our orthopedic department between January 2020 and January 2022. They were randomly assigned to either the robot-assisted group or the control group. Various parameters, including surgical duration, intraoperative bleeding, fluoroscopy frequency, postoperative pain, length of hospitalization, postoperative hematological indices, postoperative functional scores, and postoperative complications, were compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, and preoperative hematological parameters between the two groups. The robot-assisted group exhibited significantly shorter surgical duration, lower fluoroscopy frequencies, lower postoperative pain scores, and shorter length of hospitalization compared to the control group. At 3 and 6 months postoperatively, patients in the robot-assisted group demonstrated significantly higher Majeed functional scores in comparison to the control group. However, there were no significant differences in Majeed scores at 12 months postoperatively. Moreover, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications between the two groups. Conclusion: Robot-assisted minimally invasive treatment of pelvic fractures using hollow screws effectively reduced surgical duration, mitigated intraoperative bleeding and postoperative pain, shortened hospital stays, and promoted faster functional recovery.
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.