ArticleInternational orthopaedics2019
Comparison between free-hand and O-arm-based navigated posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly cohorts with three-level lumbar degenerative disease.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison of dose between cone beam computed tomography and conventional computed tomography in broad beam geometry.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026Article
- Evaluation of feasibility accuracy and safety after 79 O-ARM based stereotactic brain biopsies.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pedicle Screw Placement Techniques Using Intraoperative Conventional, Navigation, Robot-Assisted, and Augmented Reality Guiding Systems.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Robotics and navigation in spine surgery: A narrative review.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Navigated, percutaneous, three-step technique for lumbar and sacral screw placement: a novel, minimally invasive, and maximally safe strategy.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2023Article
- O-Arm- and Guide-Device-Assisted Personalized Percutaneous Kyphoplasty for Thoracolumbar Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion assisted by intraoperative O-arm total navigation for lumbar degenerative disease: A retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Reduction of spondylolisthesis and sagittal balance correction by anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Prospective Evaluation of the Time Required for Insertion of 380 Lumbar and Sacral Pedicle Screws Using Navigation with an Intraoperative 3-Dimensional Imaging System.International journal of spine surgery · 2020Article
- Percutaneous short-segment pedicle instrumentation assisted with O-arm navigation in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2020Article
- Safety and efficacy of percutaneous kyphoplasty assisted with O-arm navigation for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures at T6 to T9 vertebrae.International orthopaedics · 2020Article
- Comparison of O-arm navigation and microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis retrospective cohort study aims to evaluate the effects of introducing the O-arm-based navigation technique into the traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure treating elderly patients with three-level lumbar degenerative diseases.
methodsForty-one consecutive elderly patients were enrolled according to the criteria. There were 21 patients in the free-hand group and 20 patients in the O-arm group. Both two groups underwent the PLIF with or without the O-arm-based navigation technique. The demographic features, clinical data and outcomes, and radiological information were collected for further analysis.
resultsThe average follow-up time was 18.3 (range, 12-28) months in the free-hand group and 16.7 (range, 12-24) months in the O-arm group. Comparison between two groups revealed no significant difference regarding demographic features. The operation time took in the navigation group was significantly less than that in the free-hand group (222.55 ± 38.00 mins versus 255.19 ± 40.26 mins, P < 0.05). Both VAS and ODI were improved post-operatively in two groups while comparison between groups showed no difference. The accuracy rate of pedicle screw positioning was 88.7% in the free-hand group to 96.9% in the O-arm group (P < 0.05).
conclusionThe O-arm-based navigation is an efficacious auxiliary technique which could significantly improve the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion, especially in cases of patients with complex anatomic degenerative diseases, without sacrificing the feasibility and reliable outcome of traditional PLIF.
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.