FindTrial
Sign In

Navigation vs Robotic Methods in Keyhole Spine Surgery: A Study

Comparative use of Navigation and Robotics in MIS TLIF : Workflow and Early outcomes. - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2026/05/110927
Enrollment
120
Registered
2026-05-22
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2026-06-01

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: M48- Other spondylopathies

Interventions

Intervention1: Nil: Nil Intervention2: Nil: Nil Control Intervention1: NIL.: NIL.

Sponsors

Stavya Spine Hospital and Research Institute
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Diagnosis of 1- or 2-level degenerative disc disease, spinal stenosis, or up to Grade II spondylolisthesis. 2. Undergoing primary 1- or 2-level MIS TLIF utilizing either standard navigation or robotic assistance

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Previous fusion surgery at the index level (revision cases). 2. Pathology related to trauma, active infection, or malignancy. 3. Severe osteoporosis requiring cement augmentation.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Intraoperative: Estimated Blood Loss (EBL), pedicle screw accuracy (Gertzbein-Robbins classification), and workflow interruptions (e.g., skiving, array repositioning). Clinical: Length of Stay (LOS) in hours, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Timepoint: Followup data will be extracted at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months.—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
NIL.Timepoint: NIL.—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Mirant Dave

Stavya Spine Hospital And Research Institute

mirantdave172@gmail.com09099597234

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jun 11, 2026