ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2018
Is a patient-specific drill template via a cortical bone trajectory safe in cervical anterior transpedicular insertion?
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-specific drill template for C2 transoral pedicle insertion in complete reduction of atlantoaxial dislocation: cadaveric efficacy and accuracy assessments.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Trial
- Are Patient-Specific 3-Dimensionally Printed Instrumentations a Viable Solution to Safe Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement? A Systematic Review.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- A novel radiographic analysis system for subaxial cervical spine pedicle screw placement.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Clinical applications and prospects of 3D printing guide templates in orthopaedics.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2022Review
- Progress of the Anterior Transpedicular Screw in Lower Cervical Spine: A Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to develop patient-specific drill templates by computer numerical control or three-dimensional printing via two cortical bone trajectories (CBTs) and to evaluate their efficacies and accuracies in cervical anterior transpedicular insertion.
methodsPreoperative CT images of 20 cadaveric cervical vertebrae (C3-C7) were obtained. After image processing, patient-specific drill templates were randomly assigned to be constructed via two CBTs (CBT0 and CBT0.7) and manufactured by two methods (computer numerical control and three-dimensional printing). Guided by patient-specific drill templates, 3.5-mm-diameter screws were inserted into the pedicles. Postoperative CT scans were performed to evaluate the screw deviation in the entry point and midpoint of the pedicle. The screw positions were also graded.
resultsComputer numerical control patient-specific drill templates had a significantly shorter manufacturing time compared to three-dimensional-printed patient-specific drill templates (p < 0.01). Absolute deviations at the entry point and midpoint of the pedicle had no significant differences on the transverse and sagittal planes (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences in screw positions (p = 0.3). However, three screw positions were in grade 3 in CBT0, while the others were in grade 1.
conclusionsCBT0.7 appears to be a safe and feasible trajectory for cervical anterior transpedicular insertion. Bio-safe computer numerical control patient-specific drill templates can facilitate cervical anterior transpedicular insertion with good feasibility and accuracy.
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.