Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35602175›Full record

ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2022

Template guided cervical pedicle screw instrumentation.

Mazda Farshad, José Miguel Spirig, Elin Winkler, Daniel Suter, Nadja Farshad-Amacker, Jan-Sven Jarvers, Sven Kevin Tschöke, Christoph-Eckhard Heyde, Anna-Katharina Calek

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement using a patient-specific template guide system and risk factor analysis for screw perforation: CT-based evaluation of 437 screws.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 · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Navigation surgery in musculoskeletal disorders.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Bone density optimized pedicle screw insertion.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mazda FarshadUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
José Miguel SpirigUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Elin WinklerUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Daniel SuterUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Nadja Farshad-AmackerUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Jan-Sven JarversDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Sven Kevin TschökeDepartment of Orthopaedics, Klinikum Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany.
Christoph-Eckhard HeydeDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Anna-Katharina CalekUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHUniversity Hospital Leipzig · DEKlinikum Dortmund · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pedicle screw instrumentation of the cervical spine, although technically challenging due to the potential risk of serious neurovascular injuries, is biomechanically favorable for stabilization purposes. Patient-specific templates are increasingly used in the thoracolumbar spine with excellent accuracy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement with patient-specific templates in a clinical setting and to report the European experience so far. Methods: Multicentric, retrospectively obtained data of twelve patients who underwent dorsal instrumentation of the cervical spine with 3D-printed patient-specific templates were analyzed. Postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans were used to evaluate pedicle perforation and screw deviations between the planned and actual screw position. Furthermore, surgical time, radiation exposure, blood loss and immediate postoperative complications were analyzed. Results: A total of 86 screws were inserted, of which 82 (95.3%) were fully contained inside the pedicle. All perforations (four screws, 4.7%) were within the safe zone of 2 mm and did not result in any neurovascular complications. Overall, median deviation from planned entry point (Euclidean distance) was 1.2 mm (0.1 - 11 mm), median deviation from the planned trajectory (Euler angle) was 4.4° (0.2-71.5°), median axial and sagittal trajectory deviation from the planned trajectory were 2.5° (0 - 57.5°) and 3.3° (0 - 54.9°), respectively. Median operative time was 168 minutes (111 - 564 minutes), median blood loss was 300 ml (150 - 1300 ml) and median intraoperative fluoroscopic dose was 321.2 mGycm Conclusion: Patient-specific 3D-printed templates provide a highly accurate option for placing cervical pedicle screws for dorsal instrumentation of the cervical spine.

Indexed as

Cervical spinePatient-specific templatePedicle screwPedicle screw accuracyPedicle screw instrumentationThree-dimensional model

Identifiers

PMID35602175
PMCPMC9118173
OpenAlexW4225268810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.