Is robot-assisted pedicle screw placement really superior to conventional surgery? An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Abstract

Background: Over the past two decades, modern spine surgery has become increasingly intellectualized and minimally invasive. However, whether using robots in spine surgery results in more accurate pedicle screw placement remains a topic of debate. This study aimed to evaluate the certainty and quality of the available evidence on the efficacy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. Methods: We performed an overview of reviews including systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) regarding the accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. Regarding the SRs/MAs, five electronic databases were searched from inception to 28 April 2023. There were no restrictions on the language or population. The quality and certainty of the evidence were evaluated with PRISMA, AMSTAR-2, ROBIS, Veritas plot, and GRADE tools. Results: Fifteen SRs/MAs were analyzed. The findings indicated that the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the robot-assisted group was not superior to that in the freehand group. All the SRs/MAs were of low or critically low quality. The main reasons for this include missing data, lack of transparency, lack of sensitivity analysis, and measurement of heterogeneity in the included studies, registration of reporting protocols, and deficiencies in the study inclusion methods and selection criteria. Conclusions: While there is potential for robot-assisted pedicle screw placement to offer superior accuracy compared to conventional surgery, the current evidence is limited by methodological shortcomings. The quality of the studies analyzed was insufficient to provide a robust basis for developing clinical guidelines. Further high-quality research is necessary to confirm the benefits and establish clearer recommendations.

Keywords

• methodological quality
• overview of reviews
• pedicle screw placement
• robot-assisted spine surgery