ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2019
Standard navigation versus intraoperative computed tomography navigation in upper cervical spine trauma.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy and safety of C2 pedicle or pars screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- Machine-Learning-Based Prediction of Cervical Pedicle Screw Malposition from Clinical and Anatomical Features.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted anterior and posterior cervical spine surgeries.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Article
- Early experience with a rapid navigation system-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopic interbody fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Accuracy and safety of navigated pedicle screw insertion in cervical spine fractures.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Optimizing Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Exoscopic Technology: A Review of Key Innovations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The surgical treatment of upper cervical spine trauma in octogenerians.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Comparison of iCT-based navigation and fluoroscopic-guidance for atlantoaxial screw placement in 78 patients with traumatic cervical spine injuries.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 · 2024Article
- Accurate Placement and Revisions for Cervical Pedicle Screws Placed With or Without Navigation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Epidemiology and Management of Iatrogenic Vertebral Artery Injury Associated With Cervical Spine Surgery.Korean journal of neurotrauma · 2022Review
- Comparison of radiation exposure and surgery time between an intraoperative CT with automatic surface registration and a preoperative CT with manual surface registration in navigated spinal surgeries.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 · 2022Article
- Initial Intraoperative Experience with Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement with CirqJournal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn surgery of C1-C2 fractures, standard navigation for screw placement based on preoperative image data was compared with intraoperative imaging guidance applying intraoperative computed tomography (iCT) with a special focus on accuracy of screw placement, workflow, and radiation exposure.
methodsA single surgeon series of 16 consecutive patients with C1-C2 trauma was retrospectively analyzed. Seven patients were operated with standard navigation; preoperative image data were registered by a 20-point surface-matching process for each vertebra. Nine patients were operated with iCT guidance, allowing automatic navigation registration. Screw placement was examined and graded with either iCT or postoperative CT. Dose length product of CT and dose area products of fluoroscopy scans were assessed; effective radiation doses were estimated based on conversion factors. Radiation doses of intraoperative and postoperative X-ray and/or CT diagnostics for each group were summarized to compare the total effective doses.
resultsA total number of 72 screws were placed, 26 in the standard navigation group including 24 screws in C1 and C2, and 46 screws in the iCT group including 34 screws in C1 and C2. 15.38% (n = 4) of the C2 screws showed a grade 1 deviation and 3.8% (n = 1) a grade 2 deviation applying standard navigation. There was no misplacement of screws in the iCT group. Mean operating time in the standard navigation group was 186.57 min versus 157.11 min in the iCT group, while the mean summarized effective dose was 1.129 mSv in the standard navigation and 2.129 mSv in the iCT group.
conclusioniCT navigated surgery can lead to higher accuracy and shorter operating time compared to standard navigated operations. iCT is a safe and straightforward procedure allowing reduction in radiation exposure of the medical staff, while modified scan protocols resulted in a radiation exposure that is lower than in standard diagnostic neck CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30171444What 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.