Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20448816›Full record

ArticleThe open orthopaedics journal2010

Perforation rates of cervical pedicle screw insertion by disease and vertebral level.

Masashi Uehara, Jun Takahashi, Hiroki Hirabayashi, Hiroyuki Hashidate, Nobuhide Ogihara, Keijiro Mukaiyama, Shota Ikegami, Hiroyuki Kato

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The open orthopaedics journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Acceptable errors with evaluation of 577 cervical pedicle screw placements.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Screw perforation rates in 359 consecutive patients receiving computer-guided pedicle screw insertion along the cervical to lumbar spine.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Masashi UeharaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shinshu University, School of Medicine, 3-1-1 Asahi, Matsumoto-City, Nagano, 390-8621, Japan.
Jun Takahashi
Hiroki Hirabayashi
Hiroyuki Hashidate
Nobuhide Ogihara
Keijiro Mukaiyama
Shota Ikegami
Hiroyuki Kato
Shinshu University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferent perforation rates for cervical pedicle screws by disease are expected in relation to bone quality and pedicle morphology; however, no report comparing pedicle screw perforation rate by disease had previously been published. This study investigated the perforation rates of pedicle screws inserted to cervical pedicle by disease and vertebral level using a CT-based navigation system. MATERIALS/

methodsFifty-three patients who underwent cervical pedicle screw insertion using CT based navigation system were studied. Diseases included rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (24 cases), destructive spondyloarthropathy (DSA) (10), cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) (9), spine tumor (6), and cervical spondylotic myelopathy associated with athetoid cerebral palsy (CP) (4). Screw perforation rates for cervical pedicle screws were studied. Major perforation was defined as perforation 50% of screw diameter or more.

resultsMajor perforation rate by disease from C3 to C7 was as follows: spine tumor (0/24, 0%), RA (2/59, 3.4%), DSA (3/65, 4.6%), CP (2/20, 10.0%), and CSM (6/40, 15.0%). There were no clinically important complications such as vertebra arterial injury, spinal cord injury, or nerve root injury caused by any screw perforation. Major perforation rate by vertebral level was: C2(2/30, 6.7%), C3(4/49, 8.2%), C4(6/43, 14.0%), C5(1/32, 3.1%), C6(1/41, 2.4%), and C7(1/45, 2.2%), showing highest rate for C4, followed by C3.

conclusionsCervical pedicle screw perforation rate by disease was higher in CSM compared to RA and DSA. The perforation rate by vertebral level was higher for C4 and C3, in this order.

Indexed as

Cervical pedicle screwimage guidanceperforation rate.

Identifiers

PMID20448816
PMCPMC2864428
OpenAlexW2168191615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.