ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Accuracy and influencing factors of robot-assisted sacroiliac screw placement: a comparative study of short versus trans-cortical screws.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To systematically evaluate the accuracy of robot-assisted sacroiliac screw placement, compare the precision difference between short screws and trans-cortical (through-and-through) screws, and analyze factors associated with screw malposition. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 149 patients with pelvic fractures who underwent robot-assisted sacroiliac screw placement at Gansu Provincial Hospital from January 2021 to October 2025. A total of 149 sacroiliac screws (93 short, 56 trans-cortical) were included. Screw accuracy was assessed by postoperative pelvic CT using the Smith grading system. Functional outcomes were evaluated by Majeed score at 6 months. Univariate analysis was used to explore risk factors for malposition, but results are presented as exploratory due to the limited number of events. The overall accuracy rate was 98.0% (146/149). The accuracy of short screws (98.9%, 92/93) was significantly higher than that of trans-cortical screws (96.4%, 54/56, P = 0.035). All malpositioned screws were Smith grade I (cortical breach ≤ 2 mm). Univariate analysis suggested that screw type (P = 0.035) and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² (P = 0.031) were associated with malposition, but these findings are exploratory and should be interpreted with caution, as they are based on only five malposition events. The excellent-good rate of Majeed score at 6 months was 91.4% (85/93) in the short screw group and 85.7% (48/56) in the trans-cortical group (P = 0.097). Robot-assisted sacroiliac screw placement demonstrates excellent overall accuracy. Short screws show a potential accuracy advantage over trans-cortical screws. However, given the small number of malposition events and the exploratory nature of the analysis, these results should be interpreted cautiously. The most common technical cause of malposition was oblique bone surface at the entry point, which deserves greater attention as a modifiable factor. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42599334What 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.