Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40199753›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Deviation from preoperative planning and pedicle screw accuracy in navigated and robotic spinal fusion: a systematic review.

Fabrizio Russo, Niccolò Nardi, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Rocco Papalia, Gianluca Vadalà, Vincenzo Denaro

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Automated multi-objective pedicle screw planning.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Fabrizio RussoOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128, Roma, Italy.
Niccolò NardiOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128, Roma, Italy.
Giuseppe Francesco PapaliaOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128, Roma, Italy.
Rocco PapaliaOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128, Roma, Italy.
Gianluca VadalàOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128, Roma, Italy. g.vadala@policlinicocampus.it.ORCID 0000-0001-7142-1660
Vincenzo DenaroOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128, Roma, Italy.

Funding

Istituto Nazionale per l'Assicurazione Contro Gli Infortuni sul Lavoro BRIC-2021 ID4
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeImage-guided navigation and robotic systems have been introduced in spinal surgery to increase the accuracy of pedicle screws placement and reduce the rate of complications. The objective of this study is to evaluate the different final screw deviation from pre-operative planning and the associated pedicle screw accuracy in spinal fusion surgery assisted by image-guided navigation or robotic systems.

methodsThe systematic literature search was executed using PubMed-Medline, Cochrane Central, and Scopus on 30 April 2023. Studies that explored the deviation between final position and preoperative planning of pedicle screws assisted by image-guide navigation or robotic system were included. The data extracted were surgical approach, surgical aid, number of screws evaluated, spinal levels, accuracy and deviation of screws. The quality of the studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) or the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) score.

resultsThis review included 15 studies, of which 5 used navigation and 10 robotic system. The studies involved 1487 patients, with the evaluation of a total of 7274 pedicle screws, with an assessment of planning and final position. The different methodologies to calculate the deviation include angular deviations in the axial and sagittal plane, 3D angular deviation, and tip and entry point deviation. Regarding screw accuracy, 98.15% of the screws were grade A or B, and 1.85% as category C or D.

conclusionAlthough preoperative planning allows the surgeon to plan the final position of the screw most appropriately, mild deviations from it do not seem to excessively influence the accuracy of the spinal fusion.

Indexed as

Pedicle ScrewsRobotic Surgical ProceduresSpinal FusionSurgery, Computer-AssistedHumansPreoperative CareComputer-assisted navigationPedicle screw accuracyPreoperative planningSpinal fusionSystematic review

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.