Robot-assisted technique vs conventional freehand technique in spine surgery: A meta-analysis
- PMID: 33370470
- DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.13964
Robot-assisted technique vs conventional freehand technique in spine surgery: A meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: The impact of robot-assisted techniques versus conventional freehand techniques in terms of the accuracy of pedicle screw placement remains conflicting. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate this relationship.
Methods: A systematic literature search up to July 2020 was performed and 15 studies were detected with 6041 pedicle screw placements with 2748 of them were using robot-assisted techniques and 3293 were conventional freehand techniques. They reported relationships between robot-assisted techniques and conventional freehand techniques in pedicle screw placement. Odds ratio (OR) or Mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated comparing the robot-assisted techniques to conventional freehand techniques in pedicle screw placement risks using the dichotomous and continuous method with a random or fixed-effect model.
Results: Robot-assisted techniques had a significantly higher screw position grade A in Gertzbein-Robbins classification of the screw placement accuracy (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.66-3.54, P < .001); shorter postoperative stay (MD, -0.67; 95% CI, -1.16 to -0.19, P < .001); lower intraoperative blood loss (MD, -91.64; 95% CI, -152.44 to -30.83, P = .003); fewer intraoperative radiation dose (MD, -23.52; 95% CI, -40.12 to -6.0.93, P = .005); and low proximal facet violations (MD, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03-0.20, P < .001) compared with conventional freehand techniques. However, no significant difference was found between robot-assisted techniques and conventional freehand techniques in surgical time (OR, 11.71; 95% CI, 03.27-26.70, P = .13); visual analogue scale scores (MD, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.54 to 0.23, P = .44); and Oswestry disability index scores (MD, 0.21; 95% CI, -5.09-5.51, P = .94).
Conclusions: The extent of the improvement with robot-assisted techniques in screw position grade A in Gertzbein-Robbins classification of the screw placement accuracy, postoperative stay, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative radiation dose, and proximal facet violations was significantly better than conventional freehand techniques. This relationship forces us to recommend robot-assisted techniques for pedicle screw placement to avoid any possible negative postoperative results.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-assisted Technique Versus Conventional Freehand Technique in Spine Surgery From Nine Randomized Controlled Trials: A Meta-analysis.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Jan 15;45(2):E111-E119. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003193. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020. PMID: 31404053 Review.
-
Robot-assisted and conventional freehand pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Eur Spine J. 2018 Apr;27(4):921-930. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5333-y. Epub 2017 Oct 14. Eur Spine J. 2018. PMID: 29032475
-
Comparison of robot-assisted and freehand pedicle screw placement for lumbar revision surgery.Int Orthop. 2021 Jun;45(6):1531-1538. doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04825-1. Epub 2020 Sep 28. Int Orthop. 2021. PMID: 32989559
-
Accuracy and postoperative assessment of robot-assisted placement of pedicle screws during scoliosis surgery compared with conventional freehand technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis.J Orthop Surg Res. 2024 Jun 20;19(1):365. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-04848-z. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024. PMID: 38902785 Free PMC article.
-
Accuracy of robot-assisted versus conventional freehand pedicle screw placement in spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Ann Transl Med. 2020 Jul;8(13):824. doi: 10.21037/atm-20-1106. Ann Transl Med. 2020. PMID: 32793669 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Robot-assisted technique versus freehand technique for spine surgery: an umbrella review.Ann Med. 2025 Dec;57(1):2523564. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2523564. Epub 2025 Jul 9. Ann Med. 2025. PMID: 40631354 Free PMC article.
-
Pedicle screw placement accuracy in robot-assisted versus image-guided freehand surgery of thoraco-lumbar spine (ROBARTHRODESE): study protocol for a single-centre randomized controlled trial.Trials. 2024 Feb 3;25(1):106. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-07908-1. Trials. 2024. PMID: 38310274 Free PMC article.
-
Geographic and Socioeconomic Disparities in Robotic Spine Surgery Access in the Continental United States: A Cross-Sectional Ecological Analysis.Global Spine J. 2025 Jun 24:21925682251356218. doi: 10.1177/21925682251356218. Online ahead of print. Global Spine J. 2025. PMID: 40555400 Free PMC article.
-
Robotic-assisted versus free-hand techniques in adult spinal deformity surgery: a comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes.J Robot Surg. 2025 Jul 11;19(1):375. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02543-7. J Robot Surg. 2025. PMID: 40643760 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trails and cohort studies.Syst Rev. 2024 Jul 5;13(1):170. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02600-6. Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 38970142 Free PMC article.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Tan S, Teo E, Chua H. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy of cervical, thoracic and lumbar vertebrae of Chinese Singaporeans. Eur Spine J. 2004;13:137-146.
-
- Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE. Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine. 1990;15:11-14.
-
- Hur J-W, Kim J-S, Ryu K-S, et al. Accuracy and safety in screw placement in the high cervical spine. Clin Spine Surg. 2019;32:E193-E199.
-
- Mason A, Paulsen R, Babuska JM, et al. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement using intraoperative image guidance systems: a systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;20:196-203.
-
- Aoude AA, Fortin M, Figueiredo R, et al. Methods to determine pedicle screw placement accuracy in spine surgery: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2015;24:990-1004.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources