Clinical and radiographic comparison of robot-assisted single-position versus traditional dual-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion

The potential of robot-assisted (RA) single-position (SP) lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) warrants further investigation. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of RA-SP-LLIF in improving both clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery. A total of 59 patients underwent either RA-SP-LLIF (n = 31 cases) or traditional LLIF (n = 28 cases). Surgical parameters including operative duration, estimated blood loss, and fluoroscopy duration were recorded. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Radiographic parameters were also evaluated. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of postoperative and last follow-up times, but both groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS scores. Similarly, ODI and SF-36 scores showed comparable improvements. Radiographic parameters did not significantly differ between the groups preoperatively, postoperatively, and at last follow-up (p > 0.05). Neither group showed significant improvements in pelvic tilt and sacral slope parameters compared to baseline postoperatively and at last follow-up (p > 0.05). However, the RA-SP-LLIF group exhibited significantly greater improvements in lumbar lordosis (LL; p < 0.01), segmental lordosis (SL; p < 0.01), and pelvic incidence-LL mismatch (PI-LL; p < 0.01) immediately postoperatively compared to baseline, although these differences were not significant at subsequent evaluations. Similarly, the traditional LLIF group improved the LL, SL, and PI-LL parameters postoperatively. Importantly, there was no statistically significant difference in the Bridwell grade and complications between the two groups (p = 0.83 and p = 0.88, respectively). However, the RA-SP-LLIF group had significantly shorter operative and fluoroscopy durations compared to the traditional LLIF group (p = 0.04 and p < 0.01, respectively). Both RA-SP-LLIF and traditional LLIF surgeries achieved satisfactory lordotic correction. However, RA-SP-LLIF surgery demonstrated shorter operative and fluoroscopy times compared to traditional LLIF surgery. Therefore, RA-SP-LLIF is a promising technique for enhancing surgical efficiency, safety, and precision in lumbar spinal fusion procedures.