ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Robotic-assisted versus free-hand techniques in adult spinal deformity surgery: a comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes.
Article 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.
- National Utilization of Navigation and Robotics in Inpatient Spinal Fusion Remains Low but is Increasing, 2016-2022.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Global evolution of robot-assisted spine surgery: a bibliometric and knowledge-mapping study (1997-2026).Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- LTE: comment on "Robotic-assisted versus free-hand techniques in adult spinal deformity surgery: a comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes".Journal of robotic 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adult spinal deformity (ASD) represents a challenging area in spinal surgery due to its complexity and potential for postoperative complications. While robotic systems have promised enhanced precision for pedicle screw placement, improved alignment, and potentially fewer complications, the comparative efficacy and morbidity of robotic-assisted (RA) versus free-hand (FH) techniques remains underexplored in the context of ASD. This study aims to compare postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing RA techniques versus FH surgery to manage ASD. A retrospective review was performed and included patients over 18 who underwent a posterior fusion of at least 7 segments from 2015 to 2022. Two separate cohorts were created based on the use of RA or FH. Patients were matched with a 1:5 ratio based on age, sex, utilization of posterior column osteotomy, utilization of three-column osteotomy, utilization of pelvic fixation, number of instrumented levels, and prior lumbar revision. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare 90-day complications and healthcare utilization. The RA group demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of atelectasis (3.0% vs. 6.8%; p=0.018), respiratory failure (2.7% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.010), pleural effusion (3.3% vs. 7.0%; p = 0.021), and pneumonia (2.1% vs. 6.0%; p = 0.004) compared to the FH group. In addition, the RA group also demonstrated a reduced incidence of spinal cord deficits (1.2% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.048) and a shorter average length of stay (LOS), in days (8.1 +/- 8.3 vs. 10.2 +/- 12.8; p = 0.009). In the present study, we discover that robotic assistance leads to improved short-term outcomes, including reduced rates of pulmonary (atelectasis, pneumonia, pleural effusion, respiratory failure) and neurologic (spinal cord deficit) complications, as well as shorter hospital stays. While RA systems have previously demonstrated technical advantages in pedicle screw placement, this study provides evidence of meaningful clinical benefits as well.
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.