SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024
In the era of transition from fiction to reality: Robotic-assisted neurointervention-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating the CorPath GRX robotic system in cerebral aneurysm embolization and diagnostic angiography: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Angiographic outcomes after indirect revascularization in pediatric Moyamoya disease: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Bibliometric and knowledge-map analysis of research on robot-assisted vascular interventional surgery (2015-2025).Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robot-Assisted Mechanical Thrombectomy for Neurointerventional Surgery: An Exploratory Scoping Review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Jevons Paradox: Rise of the Machines May Create More Work for Physicians.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Clinical validation and literature review of robot-assisted cerebral angiography.Chinese neurosurgical journal · 2026Article
- Ruptured fusiform callosomarginal artery aneurysm treated by excision and end-to-end reconstruction - Case report, technical considerations and review of literature.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Design and Performance of a Neurosurgery Assisting Device.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn recent years, the application of robotic assistance in diagnostic and therapeutic endovascular neurointerventional procedures has gained notable attention. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and current indications of robotic-assisted neurointerventions and to assess the degree of robotic assistance and reasons for unplanned manual conversion from robotic assistance.
methodsWe searched Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases following PRISMA guidelines and included studies with ≥ 4 patients reporting on robotic-assisted neurointerventions. We analyzed outcomes including technical success, manual conversion, procedure-related complications, morbidity, and mortality with a random-effects meta-analysis. We also identified causes of manual conversion and conducted subanalyses by procedure type and robotic system.
resultsThirteen studies, comprising 538 robotic-assisted neurointerventions, were included. Procedures were primarily diagnostic cerebral angiograms (n = 348), cerebral aneurysm embolizations (n = 127), and carotid artery stenting (n = 37). The CorPath GRX (Corindus) robotic system was employed in the majority of cases (n = 355). Across all studies, the technical success rate was 93%, and the procedure-related complication rate was 0.7%. Manual steps were necessary in all cases due to inherent procedural requirements. Unplanned manual conversion from robotic assistance was necessary in 7% of cases. Further analysis of failures identified challenging anatomies, loss of working length, and mechanical failures as the most common reasons.
conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis found that, with a certain degree of manual assistance, robotic-assisted neurointervention is highly feasible, safe, and capable of performing DCA, CAS, and therapeutic neurointerventions that can be executed with a single microcatheter involving simple coiling, stent-assisted coiling, and flow diverter embolization. However, unplanned manual conversion is not uncommon. Improvements in working length and mechanical parts, including the cassette robotic arm and console, as well as CorPath GRX compatibility with 0.035-inch wires, may reduce the rates of manual conversion for current indications. Nonetheless, technical adaptations are essential to broaden the scope of therapeutic neurointervention indications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39729141What 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.