SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
Meta-analysis of TiRobot-assisted lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease: a comprehensive evaluation of screw placement accuracy and clinical safety.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigation-assisted vs robot -assisted unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative disease: a retrospective comparative study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis: ipsilateral direct with contralateral indirect decompression.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery: an updated systematic umbrella review and meta-meta-analysis of comparisons against freehand and navigation-guided techniques.EFORT open reviews · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study focuses on the clinical management of lumbar degenerative diseases and employs meta-analysis methods to comprehensively investigate and compare the safety and pedicle screw placement accuracy of TiRobot-assisted technology versus freehand techniques in lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Although TiRobot-assisted lumbar interbody fusion has shown promise, existing studies report inconsistent findings. A systematic search was undertaken across four major databases-PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary outcomes analyzed included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, pedicle screw placement accuracy, facet joint violation (FJV) grading, radiation exposure time and dose, and postoperative hospital stay. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the TiRobot group had considerable advantages over the freehand group with respect to reduced intraoperative blood loss, improved screw placement accuracy, lower FJV grade, decreased radiation dose, shorter hospital stay, and lower ODI scores (WMD < 0, p < 0.05). However, no significant advantage was noted in operative time (WMD > 0, p < 0.05). In summary, this study presents preliminary evidence supporting the superior safety and accuracy of TiRobot-assisted approaches in the management of lumbar degenerative diseases, suggesting its potential as a viable and safe alternative in clinical practice and offering valuable insights for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40610618What 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.