What Do We Actually Mean When We Say “Robot” in Spine Surgery?

The video above captures a moment many spine surgeons recognize immediately: a growing mismatch between how we talk about robotics and the future of robotics in the operating room.

The next evolution in spine robotics is not about a better physical arm. It’s about real-time intelligence, systems that can help surgeons see, measure, and adapt as surgery unfolds. You can watch that idea play out in the presentation above, or read on for the core principles and why they matter.

The definition of “robot” in spine needs to expand

In spine surgery, “robot” has largely come to mean a mechanical actuator: stable, precise, repeatable. That capability has tremendous value. But precision alone doesn’t define intelligence.

A more useful definition of a surgical robot includes a system that can:

• see anatomy as it exists in the moment, not from an image taken hours or weeks prior
• assimilate multiple data streams simultaneously
• update guidance as anatomy, exposure, and correction change
• support real-time surgical decision-making

If a system can sense, interpret, and respond continuously in the OR, it behaves like a robot, even if its primary output is information, not motion.

‍

Better wings aren’t enough. Surgery needs a co-pilot.

Aviation didn’t become safer because planes got prettier wings. It became safer when autopilot systems introduced intelligence that could sense and respond continuously.

Spine surgery is in a similar phase. Many current robotic systems excel at executing a predefined plan with impressive accuracy. But surgery is not a static environment, and execution alone doesn’t address what surgeons face intraoperatively.

What’s missing is a co-pilot: an intelligent system that keeps the map current while anatomy changes, tissues relax, and correction progresses.

Static plans collide with a dynamic spine

Most surgical planning workflows still rely on static images, often CTs captured before meaningful surgical work begins.

Once surgery starts, those conditions immediately are outdated:

• patient positioning alters alignment
• anesthesia and relaxation alter alignment
• releases and instrumentation alter alignment
• correction maneuvers alter alignment

If navigation remains anchored to a historical snapshot, the system is guiding against a virtual spine, not the one on the table.

This is where familiar issues arise: frame shift risk, verification loops, workflow interruptions, and delayed confirmation of whether alignment goals have actually been reached.

‍

The missing element in robotics is feedback

Many robotic workflows are fundamentally one-way:

• the surgeon defines a plan
• the system executes it
• limited feedback flows back beyond positional guidance

High-performing OR teams don’t work that way. They rely on constant feedback:

• scrub nurses anticipate and adapt
• neuromonitoring interprets signals surgeons can’t directly perceive
• assistants update the operative picture in real time

The next phase of robotics brings that same model into the technology itself: continuous sensing, continuous measurement, and meaningful feedback while decisions are still being made.

‍

Real-time perception changes the surgery, not just the navigation

When anatomy and spinal alignment can be tracked and measured in real time, the workflow changes fundamentally:

• alignment becomes a live variable, not a post-hoc assessment
• unnecessary correction steps can be avoided earlier
• decision-making shifts from “follow the plan” to “respond to reality”
• the focus moves toward achieving targets with the least necessary intervention

This is about doing what is required in the moment most effectively and efficiently, and stopping when the goal is reached.

‍

How Paradigm enables real-time tracking without radiation-based workflows

Paradigm approaches navigation through computer vision and AI, not repeated imaging.

In practice:

• a sensor array called Prism, including depth sensors, captures infrared and RGB views of exposed anatomy
• vertebrae are segmented pre-operatively so each bone’s geometry is understood
• intraoperatively, each level is registered once and then continuously tracked in real time using its visual signature

When anatomy moves, tracking updates because the system is watching the anatomy itself, not inferring position from a prior scan.

This directly addresses long-standing surgeon frustrations around:

• DRFs as sources of friction and failure
• reliance on static reference images
• workflow disruption from re-registration and verification loops
  
  

Intraoperative alignment measurement is the real unlock

If alignment truly matters, it can’t be measured only after the fact.

A modern standard looks like:

• measuring alignment as the construct is being built
• confirming targets before committing to high-risk correction steps
• adapting the plan based on what the patient’s anatomy is doing that day, on that table

This enables a simple but powerful question to be answered objectively:

Have we already reached the target, and if so, what can we safely avoid?

A complex deformity case shows what changes when alignment is measurable in real time

In the deformity case shown above, the expectation was a long, high-risk operative day with multiple major correction steps.

What real-time measurement revealed was unexpected but decisive: positioning, relaxation, and early releases had already moved alignment close to target before aggressive correction began.

That information changed the surgical path:

• major correction steps were avoided
• alignment goals were achieved
• operative time dropped substantially

Estimated downstream effects included avoided implant and graft costs and several hours of OR time saved. These are case-specific estimates that illustrate a broader truth: measurement can enable simplification.

What surgeons are consistently asking for

Across discussions following the presentation, the same priorities surfaced:

• speed and reliability
• reduced workflow friction
• fewer failure modes tied to reference frames
• better shared awareness for the entire OR team

Surgeons aren’t asking for novelty. They’re asking for systems that hold up when cases are long, anatomy is complex, and plans inevitably change.

‍

The future of robotics is intelligence plus execution

Robotic arms will continue to matter. They are powerful, precise end effectors.

But the larger shift is upstream:

• continuous sensing
• real-time tracking
• intraoperative measurement
• two-way collaboration between surgeon and system

Robotics is evolving from systems that execute plans to systems that continuously enable surgeons to update those plans based on reality in the moment.

‍

The surgeon remains the pilot

None of this replaces the surgeon.

Human judgment still governs:

• ethical decisions
• trade-offs under uncertainty
• accountability
• knowing when “good” is better than “perfect”

An intelligent co-pilot doesn’t take control. It expands objective, real-time perception, so surgeons can make better decisions sooner, with more confidence.

‍