SynthesisNeurosurgical review2023
Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine (C2-T1): systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 4,165 patients and 16,669 screws.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Morphometric findings of the subaxial cervical spine among different geographic regions and the implications for cervical pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Dental Composite Offers Comparable or Greater Pullout and Shear Strength to Lateral Mass Screw Fixation in a Human Cadaveric Model.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- A visualization study of anterior transpedicular cortical screw placement in the lower cervicalspine.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Accuracy and safety of navigated pedicle screw insertion in cervical spine fractures.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive cervical spine stabilization: A multicenter study of completely percutaneous pedicle screw-rod instrumentation.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive pedicle screw placement with image-guided navigation in cervical spine injuries.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Navigated High-Speed Drill-Assisted Cervical and Upper Thoracic Pedicle Screw Placement-A Single Center Experience with 1112 Pedicle Screws.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Optimization of Paravertebral Foramen Screw Placement: A Stepwise Approach Considering O-arm Navigation Errors: Technical Note and Case Series.Neurospine · 2025Article
- Clinical Outcome of lateral mass screws for traumatic sub-axial facet dislocation.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Navigated percutaneous placement of cervical pedicle screws: An anatomical feasibility study.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Current state and future perspectives of spinal navigation and robotics-an AO spine survey.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- C2 pedicle screws combined with Roy-Camille trans-articular lateral mass screws: a possible surgical alternative for unstable cervical fractures in ankylosing spondylitis.Neurosurgical review · 2023Article
- Comparison between cervical lateral mass screw and cervical pedicle screw surgery.Neurosurgical review · 2023Article
- The Attallah screw: Where safety meets robustness in posterior subaxial cervical instrumentation.Medicine internationalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lateral mass screw (LMS) and cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation are among the most popular techniques for posterior fusion of the cervical spine. Early research prioritized the LMS approach as the trajectory resulted in fewer neurovascular complications; however, with the incorporation of navigation assistance, the CPS approach should be re-evaluated. Our objective was to report the findings of a meta-analysis focused on comparing the LMS and CPS techniques in terms of rate of various complications with inclusion of all levels from C2 to T1. We conducted a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases with final inclusion criteria focused on identifying studies that reported outcomes and complications for either the CPS or LMS technique. These studies were then pooled, and statistical analyses were performed from the cumulative data. A total of 60 studies comprising 4165 participants and 16,669 screws placed within the C2-T1 levels were identified. Within these studies, the LMS group had a significantly increased odds for lateral mass fractures (odds ratio [OR] = 43.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.62-711.42), additional cervical surgeries (OR = 5.56, 95%CI = 2.95-10.48), and surgical site infections (SSI) (OR = 5.47, 95%CI = 1.65-18.16). No other significant differences between groups in terms of complications were identified. Within the subgroup analysis of navigation versus non-navigation-guided CPS placement, no significant differences were identified for individual complications, although collectively significantly fewer complications occurred with navigation (OR = 5.29, 95%CI = 2.03-13.78). The CPS group had significantly fewer lateral mass fractures, cervical revision surgeries, and SSIs. Furthermore, navigation-assisted CPS placement was associated with a significant reduction in complications overall.
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.