ArticleSpine deformity2025
Instrumentation using robotics coupled with navigation in pediatric spine deformity surgery: a technical report of sacropelvic instrumentation.
Article in Spine deformity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThis technical report presents the intraoperative experience of using robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) for sacropelvic instrumentation in pediatric spine deformity surgery.
methodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent surgery using RAN for sacropelvic instrumentation at a single institution from 2019 to 2022 was conducted. In cases with screw confirmation imaging, screws were evaluated using the Gertzbein and Robbins classification scale.
results52 cases were included. Average age at surgery was 14.1 years and 67.3% of patients were female. The most common diagnosis was spondylolisthesis (48.1%). The average major curve in scoliosis cases was 77°. A Schanz pin in the posterior superior iliac spine was placed in 98.1% of surgeries compared to 1 case with a spinous process clamp. Intraoperative 3D imaging scans (Scan & Plan) were used for 69.2% of the robotic registrations to the patient and intraoperative fluoroscopy-CT scans were used for 30.8%. 644 total screws were placed, with 427 placed robotically. Specifically, in the sacral-pelvic region, 98 S1, 18 S2, 58 S2AI, and 5 iliac screws were placed using RAN (179 screws). In 17 cases with 139 total robotic screws, post-instrumentation intraoperative 3D imaging or postoperative CT scans were obtained. Of these screws, 99.3% (138/139; 95% CI = 95.5-99.96) were placed accurately (Grade A or Grade B). One S2AI screw had an anterior breach on intraoperative 3D imaging scan and was changed prior to closure. Loss of RAN registration was observed in 2 cases (3.8%). No cases required return to the operating room for screw malposition.
conclusionThis study highlights high screw accuracy with no neurologic compromise associated with the use of RAN technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39891842What 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.