ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2016
History of Retractor Technologies for Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation Systems.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical and non-surgical management of spondylolisthesis: a comprehensive review.Journal of medicine and life · 2025Review
- Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between open, wiltse, and percutaneous approach to traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures without neurological injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Review
- ERRATUM.Orthopaedic surgery · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive techniques aimed at minimizing surgery-associated risk and morbidity of spinal surgery have increased in popularity in recent years. Their potential advantages include reduced length of hospital stay, blood loss, and requirement for post-operative analgesia and earlier return to work. One such minimally invasive technique is the use of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation, which is paramount for promoting rigid and stable constructs and fusion in the context of trauma, tumors, deformity and degenerative disease. Percutaneous pedicle screw insertion can be an intimidating prospect for surgeons who have only been trained in open techniques. One of the ongoing challenges of this percutaneous system is to provide the surgeon with adequate access to the pedicle entry anatomy and adequate tactile or visual feedback concerning the position and anatomy of the rod and set-screw construct. This review article discusses the history and evolution of percutaneous pedicle screw retractor technologies and outlines the advances over the last decade in the rapidly expanding field of minimal access surgery for posterior pedicle screw based spinal stabilization. As indications for percutaneous pedicle screw techniques expand, the nuances of the minimally invasive surgery techniques and associated technologies will also multiply. It is important that experienced surgeons have access to tools that can improve access with a greater degree of ease, simplicity and safety. We here discuss the technical challenges of percutaneous pedicle screw retractor technologies and a variety of systems with a focus on the pros and cons of various retractor systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.