Robotic procedures reduced radiation dose compared to manual procedures in cerebral angiography patients.
This randomized controlled non-inferiority trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of robotic versus manual procedures in patients who received cerebral angiography. A total of 130 patients were enrolled across four centers. The primary outcome was the primary operator's radiation dose, while secondary outcomes included clinical success rate, technical success rate, overall surgery time, pre-puncture set-up time, puncture-to-unsheathed time, mean catheterization time per target vessel, X-ray fluoroscopy time, incidence of perioperative vascular injuries, any adverse events, and device malfunctions.
Regarding the primary outcome, the primary operator's radiation dose was lower in the robotic group than the manual group, with values of 1.67±3.49 μSv versus 43.63±38.95 μSv (P<0.001). For secondary outcomes, clinical success rate and technical success rate were 100% in both groups. Puncture-to-unsheathed time, mean catheterization time per target vessel, and X-ray fluoroscopy time were comparable between groups (P=0.882, P=0.247, and P=0.701, respectively). However, pre-puncture set-up time was longer in the robotic group (P<0.001).
Safety analysis indicated that no robot-related adverse events were observed. Serious adverse events, discontinuations, and specific tolerability metrics were not reported. The study did not report funding sources or conflicts of interest. Limitations regarding the study phase, publication type, and follow-up duration were not reported. Given the non-inferiority design and lack of reported serious adverse events, the intervention appears safe in this context, but the longer set-up time warrants consideration for workflow efficiency.