ArticleAsian spine journal2025
Evaluating the feasibility of pinless robot-assisted spine surgery: a prospective study of 750 cases and 3,924 screws in the thoracolumbar spine in India.
Article in Asian spine journal, 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.
- The Woodpecker variable-speed drilling protocol for robot-assisted subaxial cervical pedicle screw placement: technique and a consecutive series of 1027 screws.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Response to the letter to the editor: Beyond fixation: computational and motion-integrated perspectives on pinless robot-assisted spine surgery.Asian spine journal · 2026Article
- Letter to the editor: Beyond fixation: computational and motion-integrated perspectives on pinless robot-assisted spine surgery.Asian spine journal · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designThis single-center prospective study compared pin-mounted and pinless robot-assisted techniques for thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement. PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility, accuracy, and safety of a novel pinless technique in comparison to the traditional pin-mounted method in thoracolumbar fusion surgery. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Robot-assisted spine surgery has enhanced the precision of pedicle screw placement and reduced radiation exposure. While conventional pin-mounted techniques are effective, they can lead to hardware-related complications. Emerging evidence indicates that eliminating bone-mounted fixation could streamline the surgical workflow without compromising accuracy or safety.
methodsA total of 750 consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted thoracolumbar fusion were enrolled. Two groups were defined: 200 cases (890 screws) using the pin-mounted approach and 550 cases (3,034 screws) utilizing the pinless method. All procedures employed intraoperative computed tomography imaging and a standardized protocol with a table-mounted robotic system. Screw accuracy was assessed using the Gertzbein-Robbins grading system, with grades A and B classified as acceptable. Secondary parameters, including operative time, blood loss, and radiation exposure, were also recorded.
resultsThe pin-mounted group achieved an overall pedicle screw accuracy of 99.55% compared to 99.40% in the pinless group (p >0.05). There were four breaches in the pin-mounted group and 18 breaches in the pinless group, all of which were revised intraoperatively, with no permanent neurovascular injuries or major complications reported. Blood loss and radiation exposure were similar between the groups.
conclusionsThe pinless robot-assisted pedicle screw placement technique demonstrates accuracy and safety comparable to the traditional pin-mounted method. By eliminating bone-mounted fixation, this approach simplifies the surgical workflow and reduces hardwarerelated complications, making it an effective alternative for thoracolumbar fusion surgery.
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.