ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2024
Effect of L5 spinal canal type on pedicle screw placement based on CT imaging: a retrospective clinical study.
Article in 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, 2024. 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.
- Automated multi-trajectory planning for C1-C2 screw fixation using CT-derived 3D models.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 · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of Deep Learning Preoperative Planning Software for Automatic Lumbosacral Screw Selection Using Computed Tomography.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to investigate the optimal entry point and pedicle camber angle for L5 pedicle screws of different canal types.
methodsCT imaging data were processed by Mimics for simulated pedicle screw placement, and PD (Pedicle diameter), PCA (Pedicle camber angle), LD (Longitudinal distance), TD (Transverse distance), and PBG (Pedicle screw breach grade) were measured. Then they were divided into the Round group and Trefoil group according to the type of spinal canal. When comparing PD, PCA, LD, TD, and PBG, the two sides of the pedicle were compared separately, so they were first divided into the round-type pedicle group and the trefoil-type pedicle group.
resultsIn the round-type pedicle group (n = 134) and the trefoil-type pedicle group (n = 264), there was no significant difference in PD and LD, but there was a significant difference in PCA between the two groups (t = - 4.072, P < 0.05). A statistically significant difference in the distance of the Magerl point relative to the optimal entry point (t = - 3.792, P < 0.05), and the distance of the Magerl point relative to the optimal entry point was greater in the trefoil-type pedicle group than in the round-type pedicle group.
conclusionThe optimal entry point for L5 is more outward than the Magerl point, and the Trefoil spinal canal L5 is more outwardly oriented than the Round spinal canal L5, with a greater angle of abduction during pedicle screw placement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37659047What 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.