ArticleCureus2024
Beyond the Learning Curve of Robot-Assisted Navigation Spine Surgery: Refinement of Outcomes With Extended Experience.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Robotically equipped 3D hybrid operating room in spine and trauma surgery - updated experience in 359 patients and 2080 screws.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Ninety-Day Complication and Revision Surgery Rates Using Navigated Robotics in Thoracolumbar Spine Surgery: A PRoGRSS Interim Analysis.International journal of spine surgery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study assessed whether robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) spine surgery outcomes, including operative time and pedicle screw accuracy, continue to improve with extended experience beyond 200 cases. Methods This is a retrospective review of 60 patients who underwent lumbosacral transforaminal interbody fusion using RAN. Patients were segmented into three groups of 20 consecutive cases each. The first group represented a surgical performance baseline leading up to the investigating surgeon's 200th RAN case. The subsequent two groups were selected beyond the 200th case with an average of 15 cases between groups. Pedicle screw accuracy and intraoperative outcomes were assessed. Statistical results were significant if p<0.05. Results Measures of surgical efficiency significantly improved beyond the investigating surgeon's 200th RAN case. As case number increased, the following parameters significantly decreased: registration time (group 1: 16.9±6.5, group 2: 12.9±3.0, group 3: 8.7±1.6 minutes; p<0.05), screw insertion time (group 1: 14.9±3.5, group 2: 10.9±2.0, group 3: 8.4±2.7 minutes; p<0.05), and total operative time significantly decreased from group 1 (175.9±58.2 minutes) to group 2 (135.8±23.9 minutes) (p=0.013) with a non-significant decrease to group 3 (121.5±32.3 minutes). Accuracy (Grade = A) significantly increased across groups (group 1: 87%, group 2: 94%, group 3: 98%; p=0.024). Group 1 had the highest misplacement rate of 3.7% (4/108 screws). The overall misplacement rate was 1.4% (4/290 screws) (Grade C-E). There was a higher rate of lateral screw misplacement compared to medial misplacement. Conclusion Even with a small number of initial cases, RAN spine surgery can consistently be performed with high accuracy and acceptable intraoperative outcomes. However, this study demonstrated refined outcomes with extended robotic experience.
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.