ReviewInsights into imaging2018
A practical guide for planning pelvic bone percutaneous interventions (biopsy, tumour ablation and cementoplasty).
Review in Insights into imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design and 3D printing of pelvis phantoms for cementoplasty.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Bone Biopsies: Practical Considerations and Technical Tips.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Development of a fluoroscopically guided robotic assistant for instrument placement in pelvic trauma surgery.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021Article
- Fluoroscopic Guidance of a Surgical Robot: Pre-clinical Evaluation in Pelvic Guidewire Placement.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2021Article
- Review article: the current status of CT-guided needle biopsy of the spine.Skeletal radiology · 2021Review
- Cementoplasty of pelvic bone metastases: systematic assessment of lesion filling and other factors that could affect the clinical outcomes.Skeletal radiology · 2019Article
- Percutaneous osteoplasty for the management of a humeral head metastasis: Two case reports.Medicine · 2019Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous approaches for pelvic bone procedures (bone biopsies, tumour ablation and cementoplasty) are multiple and less well systematised than for the spine or extremities. Among the different imaging techniques that can be used for guidance, computed tomography (CT) scan is the modality of choice because of the complex pelvic anatomy. In specific cases, such as cementoplasty where real-time evaluation is a determinant, a combination of CT and fluoroscopy is highly recommended. The objective of this article is to propose a systematic approach for image-guided pelvic bone procedures, as well as to provide some technical tips. We illustrate the article with multiple examples, and diagrams of the approaches and important structures to avoid to perform these procedures safely. TEACHING POINTS: • Pelvic bone procedures are safe to perform if anatomical landmarks are recognised. • The safest approach varies depending on the pelvic level. • CT is the modality of choice for guiding pelvic percutaneous procedures. • Fluoroscopy is recommended when real-time monitoring is mandatory. • MRI can also be used for guiding pelvic percutaneous procedures.
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.