ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2019
Comparing the Biomechanical Stability of Cortical Screw Trajectory Versus Standard Pedicle Screw Trajectory for Short- and Long-Segment Posterior Fixation in 3-Column Thoracic Spinal Injury.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical efficacy and radiological outcomes of a novel screw placement technique for the treatment of traumatic thoracolumbar vertebral fractures under navigation guidance.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Factors that influence long term instrumentation stability in patients with unstable thoracolumbar injuries.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformation on the performance of posterior fixation with cortical screw (CS) versus pedicle screw (PS) trajectories for stabilizing thoracolumbar burst fractures is limited. Therefore, we sought to analyze stability with CS versus PS in short- and long-segment fixations using a 3-column spinal injury model.
methodsNondestructive flexibility tests: (1) intact, (2) intact + short fixation, (3) intact + long fixation, (4) after burst fracture, (5) short fixation + burst fracture, and (6) long fixation + burst fracture using thoracic spine segments (7 CS, 7 PS).
resultsWith CS, the range of motion (ROM) was significantly greater with short-segment than with long-segment fixation in all directions, with and without burst fracture (
conclusionsCS trajectory is a valid alternative to PS trajectory for thoracic spine fixation in 3-column spinal injuries, and long-segment fixation is superior to short-segment fixation with either.
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.