ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2022
Three-dimensional digital anatomical measurement of modified sacroiliac screws.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- S3 sacral-alar iliac screws application in partial sacral resection for an aneurysmal bone cyst: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2025Article
- Safe Optimal Tear Drop View for Spinopelvic Fixation Using a Three-Dimensional Reconstruction Model of the Pelvis.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2023Article
- CT-based Anatomic and Clinical Analysis of Iliac Screw Placement During Spinopelvic Fixation.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo rebuild a model of the pelvis and effectively simulate the trajectory of modified sacroiliac screws, we measured the parameters of each screw and screw channel and assessed the safety and feasibility of the parameters in adults. METHOD AND MATERIALS: One hundred (50 males and 50 females) normal adult pelvic computed tomography (CT) images were randomly selected and imported into Mimics software to rebuild the three-dimensional pelvis model. In these models, each ideal channel of modified screws was simulated, and then we obtained the precise parameters of screws and channels using Mimics and Three-matic software.
resultsThe results of the comparison (right vs. left) showed that there were no significant differences in any of the angles, radius or M1SI parameters (the first modified sacroiliac). However, one parameter (BS) of M2SI (the second modified sacroiliac), two parameters (AP and BS) of M3SI (the third modified sacroiliac), and three parameters (AP, BS, L) of M4SI (the fourth modified sacroiliac) were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The result of comparison (between genders) showed that there were no significant differences in M1SI and M2SI; in contrast, the radius, length and the α angle of M3SI and M4SI were significantly different between genders (P < 0.05), and the radius of M4SI required special attention. If the radius of the limiting screw channel was > 3.50 mm, 52 cases (52%, 24 males and 28 females) could not complete the M4SI screw placement among 100 samples. If the radius of the limiting screw channel was > 3.0 mm, a total of 10 cases (10%, 2 males and 8 females) could not complete the M4SI screw placement.
conclusionThrough the measurement of 100 healthy adult real three-dimensional pelvic models, we obtained the parameters of each modified sacroiliac screw and measured the three angles of each screw based on international coordinates for the first time, which can instruct clinical application.
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.