Safety and Accuracy of Robot-Assisted Cervical Screw Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy and safety of robot-assisted (RA) cervical screw placement with conventional freehand (FH) technique.

Computer-based searches were conducted on various databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, the China Biology Medicine, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting the use of RA techniques for cervical screw placement and providing data on safety and accuracy outcomes. Primary outcome indicators focused on the accuracy of screw placement, while secondary outcome indicators included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication rate, and radiation dose. Data from eligible studies were extracted and synthesized using a forest plot analysis.

A total of 312 patients (1233 screws) from 6 studies were included, with 148 patients (47.4% with 567 screws) in the RA group. Perfect screw accuracy, as categorized by Gertzbein-Robbins grade A, was significantly superior with RA surgery compared to FH technique. RA screw implantation significantly reduced complication rates, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospitalization, and radiation dose compared to the conventional FH group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in surgery time between the RA and FH groups.

RA surgery significantly improves the accuracy of cervical screw insertion and offers potential advantages in terms of reduced complications and blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and decreased radiation exposure. However, the impact on operative time remains uncertain. Further high-quality studies, including large-scale randomized controlled trials, are needed to strengthen the evidence base.