ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2026
Robotic-assisted percutaneous iliac fixation: Outcomes, history, and review.
Article in North American Spine Society journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Long-construct fusions extending into the pelvis require durable sacropelvic fixation to withstand biomechanical forces. Traditional iliac screws provide strong fixation but are limited by wound complications, offset-connector requirements, and hardware prominence. S2-alar-iliac screws improve soft-tissue outcomes but may violate the sacroiliac joint, contribute to postoperative sacroiliac joint pain, and demonstrate variable fusion rates. With advances in robotics, medialized iliac trajectories may re-establish the advantages of iliac fixation while reducing complication profiles. This study evaluates the safety, accuracy, and perioperative outcomes of robotically placed iliac screws using a medialized, percutaneous technique. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent robotically navigated iliac fixation between January 1, 2019, and January 1, 2025. Demographic, perioperative, and postoperative variables were collected, including sex, body mass index (BMI), ASA class, blood loss, surgery duration, complications, opioid use, visual analog scale pain scores, and primary versus revision status. Results: Twenty-eight patients met inclusion criteria (9 primary, 19 revision). Mean age was 67.21 years, mean BMI 26.77, and mean ASA of 2.07. Mean blood loss was 81.61 mL. Mean visual analog scale scores improved by 2.11 points at 2 weeks. No surgical-site infections occurred. Two patients required revision for symptomatic hardware prominence, both with BMI<20. Two patients had 90-day complications unrelated to iliac fixation. Screw accuracy was 100%, with no cortical breaches or offset-connector requirements. Conclusions: Robotically placed medialized iliac screws appear to mitigate shortcomings of traditional iliac and S2-alar-iliac fixation. This technique avoids sacroiliac joint violation, minimizes wound complications, and provides precise fixation, representing a safe and effective technique. These findings support further investigation through prospective, comparative studies with longer follow-up to validate the long-term durability and generalizability of this approach.
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.