ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023
Morphology analysis of the C2 pediculoisthmic component and feasibility of safe C2 pedicle screw placement: comparison of multiplanar reconstruction versus traditional radiographic methods.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Experimental study of patient-specific three-dimensional-printed drill guide-assisted CZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- Preoperative evaluation of C2 pedicle screw placement using a deep learning model: Development and validation study.PloS one · 2026Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPreoperatively evaluating the feasibility of safe C2 pedicle screw placement is the key to avoiding iatrogenic vertebral artery injury. However, it has not been verified whether the conventional CT measurements of C2 pediculoisthmic component (PIC) are reliable and accurate, and the results may lack validity. The purpose of this study is to analyze the evaluative performance of conventional CT measurements and to create an accurate predictor of morphometrics of C2 PIC.
methodsA total of 304 C2 PICs were measured in 152 consecutive patients who underwent CT examination of the cervical spine between April 2020 and December 2020. We obtained the morphometric parameters of C2 PIC by measuring minimum PIC diameter (MPD) in CT multiplanar reconstruction versus conventional measurements of transverse PIC width (TPW), oblique PIC width (OPW) and definition of high-riding vertebral artery (HRVA). The outer diameter measured less than 4 mm in MPD was regarded as the standard of precluding safe C2 pedicle screw insertion. The evaluative performance of the conventional CT measurements was assessed, and the correlation between conventional CT measurements and measurements in CT multiplanar reconstruction was calculated.
resultsThe parameters in OPW and MPD were measured significantly larger than those in TPW, and the preclusion of C2 pedicle screw placement evaluated from TPW and HRVA was significantly higher than that evaluated from OPW and MPD. The sensitivity of TPW was 93.09%, and the specificity was 79.31%. The sensitivity and specificity of OPW were 97.82% and 82.76%. The sensitivity of HRVA was 88.36%, and the specificity was 96.55%. Strong agreement with the highest correlation coefficient (0.879) and determination coefficient (0.7720) suggested that the outer diameter of OPW could be useful for the precise prediction of MPD.
conclusionsCT MPR allows accurate measurement of the narrowest section of the C2 PIC. The outer diameter of OPW could be simply measured and be useful for precise prediction of MPD, which makes C2 pedicle screw placement more safely than the conventional measurement of TPW and HRVA.
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.