A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pedicle Screw Placement Techniques Using Intraoperative Conventional, Navigation, Robot-Assisted, and Augmented Reality Guiding Systems.
Kanyakorn Riewruja, Teerachat Tanasansomboon, Wicharn Yingsakmongkol, Vit Kotheeranurak, Worawat Limthongkul, Ronpichai Chokesuwattanaskul, Stephen J Kerr, Weerasak Singhatanadgige
{"title":"A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pedicle Screw Placement Techniques Using Intraoperative Conventional, Navigation, Robot-Assisted, and Augmented Reality Guiding Systems.","authors":"Kanyakorn Riewruja, Teerachat Tanasansomboon, Wicharn Yingsakmongkol, Vit Kotheeranurak, Worawat Limthongkul, Ronpichai Chokesuwattanaskul, Stephen J Kerr, Weerasak Singhatanadgige","doi":"10.14444/8618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Studies were reviewed and collected to compare different image guidance systems for pedicle screw placement (PSP) regarding accuracy and safety outcomes. Included were conventional, navigation, robot-assisted, and recent technology such as augmented reality (AR) guiding systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This network meta-analysis obtained human comparative studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding PSP found in 3 databases (Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus). Data extraction for accuracy, safety, and clinical outcomes were collected. The network meta-analysis was analyzed, and a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank the treatment for all outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final 61 studies, including 13 RCTs and 48 non-RCTs, were included in the meta-analysis. These studies included a total of 17,023 patients and 35,451 pedicle screws. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve ranking demonstrated the supremacy of robotics in almost all accuracy outcomes except for the facet joint violation. Regarding perfect placement, the risk difference for AR was 19.1 (95% CI: 8.1-30.1), which was significantly higher than the conventional method. The robot-assisted and navigation systems had improved outcomes but were not significantly different in accuracy vs the conventional technique. There was no statistically significant difference concerning safety or clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The accuracy of PSP achieved by robot-assisted technology was the highest, whereas the safety and clinical outcomes of the different methods were comparable. The recent AR technique provided better accuracy compared with navigation and conventional methods.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 2: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8618","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Studies were reviewed and collected to compare different image guidance systems for pedicle screw placement (PSP) regarding accuracy and safety outcomes. Included were conventional, navigation, robot-assisted, and recent technology such as augmented reality (AR) guiding systems.
Methods: This network meta-analysis obtained human comparative studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding PSP found in 3 databases (Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus). Data extraction for accuracy, safety, and clinical outcomes were collected. The network meta-analysis was analyzed, and a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank the treatment for all outcomes.
Results: The final 61 studies, including 13 RCTs and 48 non-RCTs, were included in the meta-analysis. These studies included a total of 17,023 patients and 35,451 pedicle screws. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve ranking demonstrated the supremacy of robotics in almost all accuracy outcomes except for the facet joint violation. Regarding perfect placement, the risk difference for AR was 19.1 (95% CI: 8.1-30.1), which was significantly higher than the conventional method. The robot-assisted and navigation systems had improved outcomes but were not significantly different in accuracy vs the conventional technique. There was no statistically significant difference concerning safety or clinical outcomes.
Conclusions: The accuracy of PSP achieved by robot-assisted technology was the highest, whereas the safety and clinical outcomes of the different methods were comparable. The recent AR technique provided better accuracy compared with navigation and conventional methods.
期刊介绍：
The International Journal of Spine Surgery is the official scientific journal of ISASS, the International Intradiscal Therapy Society, the Pittsburgh Spine Summit, and the Büttner-Janz Spinefoundation, and is an official partner of the Southern Neurosurgical Society. The goal of the International Journal of Spine Surgery is to promote and disseminate online the most up-to-date scientific and clinical research into innovations in motion preservation and new spinal surgery technology, including basic science, biologics, and tissue engineering. The Journal is dedicated to educating spine surgeons worldwide by reporting on the scientific basis, indications, surgical techniques, complications, outcomes, and follow-up data for promising spinal procedures.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
