Journal of neurosurgical sciences · 2026
Robotic versus non-robotic sacroiliac joint fusion: a meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kamar Zeyad, Koyuncu Emre, Albdewi Michael J, Ceran Serdar Ceyhan, Abouzeid Hussien, Carne Paul, Slosar Natalie, Kazemi Noojan J, Saadeh Yamaan S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to compare intraoperative metrics and postoperative outcomes of sacroiliac joint fusions (SIJF) performed under robotic versus non-robotic navigation.
METHODS: Studies of adults undergoing SIJF with intraoperative navigation that reported ≥1 relevant outcome were included. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between September 14th, 2015, and September 14th, 2025. Before data analysis, patients were split into robotic and non-robotic fusion groups, and the non-robotic group was further split into fluoroscopic (F), virtual surgical planning (2D), and stereotactic (3D) navigation subgroups. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Graphical Appraisal Tool for Epidemiological Studies (GATE). Datasets were analyzed using MedCalc and Stata.
RESULTS: Twenty papers describing 1581 SIJFs were analyzed for visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and postoperative complications. ODI and VAS showed postoperative improvement across all groups, with a steeper VAS reduction in the robotic group. Postoperative complication rates were lowest in the non-robotic (2D) subgroup, and lower in the robotic group than in the non-robotic (3D) subgroup. The non-robotic (F) subgroup had the lowest rate of new pain, whereas the robotic group had the highest. The robotic group showed the lowest rate of hematomas. Qualitative analysis of reported data suggests that robotic navigation demonstrates the highest accuracy rate, whereas fluoroscopy demonstrates the lowest. The results, although consistent, were not statistically significant, likely due to substantial heterogeneity among studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate a reduction in postoperative pain and favorable outcomes across both navigation modalities. Additionally, robotic approaches provide an added benefit of reducing intraoperative radiation exposure. Further prospective comparative studies with larger sample sizes are needed to obtain statistically significant comparative data between the groups and to reach definitive conclusions.
METHODS: Studies of adults undergoing SIJF with intraoperative navigation that reported ≥1 relevant outcome were included. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between September 14th, 2015, and September 14th, 2025. Before data analysis, patients were split into robotic and non-robotic fusion groups, and the non-robotic group was further split into fluoroscopic (F), virtual surgical planning (2D), and stereotactic (3D) navigation subgroups. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Graphical Appraisal Tool for Epidemiological Studies (GATE). Datasets were analyzed using MedCalc and Stata.
RESULTS: Twenty papers describing 1581 SIJFs were analyzed for visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and postoperative complications. ODI and VAS showed postoperative improvement across all groups, with a steeper VAS reduction in the robotic group. Postoperative complication rates were lowest in the non-robotic (2D) subgroup, and lower in the robotic group than in the non-robotic (3D) subgroup. The non-robotic (F) subgroup had the lowest rate of new pain, whereas the robotic group had the highest. The robotic group showed the lowest rate of hematomas. Qualitative analysis of reported data suggests that robotic navigation demonstrates the highest accuracy rate, whereas fluoroscopy demonstrates the lowest. The results, although consistent, were not statistically significant, likely due to substantial heterogeneity among studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate a reduction in postoperative pain and favorable outcomes across both navigation modalities. Additionally, robotic approaches provide an added benefit of reducing intraoperative radiation exposure. Further prospective comparative studies with larger sample sizes are needed to obtain statistically significant comparative data between the groups and to reach definitive conclusions.