ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2022
Accuracy and safety of percutaneous pedicle screw placement using the K-wireless minimally invasive spine percutaneous pedicle screw system in Japan: A randomized active controlled study.
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 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world outcomes of minimally invasive posterior thoracic and lumbar spine fusion surgery versus open surgery in the Finnish Spine Registry.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Article
- Risk of neurologic deficit in medially breached pedicle screws assessed by computed tomography: a systematic review.Asian spine journal · 2024Article
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
Background: Minimally invasive lumbar fusion has recently become a widely used technique worldwide. This randomized active controlled study was conducted to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the K-wireless Minimally Invasive Spine (MIS) Percutaneous Pedicle Screw (PPS) system compared with use of the six pedicle screw systems currently used in our practices with respect to the accuracy of pedicle screw placement.Also to compare the screw-insertion time and number of fluoroscopic observations during screw insertion between the groups. Methods: A total of 80 patients with degenerative spinal diseases or vertebral fractures were assigned, including 41 patients in the K-wireless MIS PPS system group (K-wireless group) and 39 in the control group (K-wire group).The accuracy of the screw insertion, screw-insertion time, number of fluoroscopic observations during screw insertion, and the incidence of adverse events were compared between the K-wireless group and the K-wire group. The accuracy rate was calculated as the number of screws with no breach divided by the total number of screws. Results: The accuracy rates of screw insertion were 85.7% and 75.0% in the K-wireless and K-wire groups, respectively, with an intergroup difference of 10.7% (95% confidence interval: 2.3-19.1%). The K-wireless group demonstrated non-inferiority compared with the K-wire group. The mean screw-insertion time was significantly shorter in the K-wireless group (2.62 and 2.97 min in the K-wireless and K-wire groups, respectively; Conclusions: The accuracy of pedicle screw insertion using the K-wireless MIS PPS system was not inferior to that of existing products. In terms of safety, no product-related or treatment-related adverse events were identified in this study and no new safety concerns were noted.
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.