ArticleBrain & spine2026
Enhancing precision in robotic navigated minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a streamlined surgical workflow: a technical note.
Article in Brain & spine, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Minimally invasive spine surgery has evolved through the integration of advanced imaging, navigation, and robotics. However, standardized workflows combining these technologies with intraoperative neuromonitoring remain limited. Research question: This technical note presents a stepwise approach for robot-assisted, navigated, and neuromonitored minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Material and methods: We describe a complete workflow using intraoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for anatomical registration, robotic arm alignment for pedicle screw trajectory guidance, and real-time triggered electromyography (tEMG) to verify screw path safety. A drill-based technique is adopted for screw placement, followed by posterior decompression and navigated interbody cage placement. An illustrative case of L4-L5 spondylolisthesis is presented to demonstrate the feasibility of this method. Results: This workflow enables navigation-based, intraoperative imaging-guided pedicle screw placement and optimized interbody cage positioning under direct neuromonitoring feedback. In the illustrative case, all screws were placed within pedicle boundaries without breaching, and optimal cage insertion was confirmed with intraoperative CBCT. The integration of robotic guidance and real-time tEMG guaranteed both surgical accuracy and intraoperative confidence. Discussion and conclusion: The described technique demonstrates how combining robotics, navigation, and neuromonitoring can streamline MIS-TLIF procedures. This approach may offer a high level of precision, promote reproducibility across surgical teams, and serve as an educational platform for the next generation of spine surgeons.
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.