ArticleNeurospine2023
Sacropelvic Fixation for Adult Deformity Surgery Comparing Iliac Screw and Sacral 2 Alar-Iliac Screw Fixation: Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analysis.
Article in Neurospine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- S2AI and iliac screw prominence and removal for symptomatic prominence: a systematic review.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 · 2025Pooled it
- Asymmetric Safety Corridors for Free-Hand S2-Alar-Iliac Screw Placement: Quantifying Direction-Specific Tolerance Around Patient-Specific Optimal Trajectories.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Modified iliac screw technique for pelvic fixation: a scoping review of technical characteristics and early clinical outcomes.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality of Meta-Analyses Comparing Sacral 2 Alar-Iliac Fixation with Iliac Screws for Adult Spinal Deformity: An Umbrella Review with Emphasis on Methodological Limitations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative efficacy of S2-alar-iliac versus iliac screw techniques in treating adult spinal deformity: a meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes and complications.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Clinical Outcomes Associated with Screw Loosening in S2 Alar-Iliac Fixation in Adult Spinal Deformity.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- S2AI vs. iliac screws in spinopelvic fixation for adult spinal deformity: a propensity score-matched analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy: techniques and outcomes.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
- CT-based Anatomic and Clinical Analysis of Iliac Screw Placement During Spinopelvic Fixation.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
- Low rates of pain requiring sacroiliac joint fusion after countersunk iliac screw for spinopelvic fixation.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
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
objectiveTwo commonly used techniques for spinopelvic fixation in adult deformity surgery are iliac screw (IS) and sacral 2 alar-iliac screw (S2AI) fixations. In this article, we systematically meta-analyzed the complications of sacropelvic fixation for adult deformity surgery comparing IS and S2AI.
methodsThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane clinical trial databases were systematically searched until March 29, 2023. The proportion of postoperative complications, including implant failure, revision, screw prominence, and wound complications after sacropelvic fixation, were pooled with a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses for the method of sacropelvic fixation were conducted.
resultsTen studies with a total of 1,931 patients (IS, 925 patients; S2AI, 1,006 patients) were included. The pooled proportion of implant failure was not statistically different between the IS and S2AI groups (21.9% and 18.9%, respectively) (p = 0.59). However, revision was higher in the IS group (21.0%) than that in the S2AI group (8.5%) (p = 0.02). Additionally, screw prominence was higher in the IS group (9.6%) than that in the S2AI group (0.0%) (p < 0.01), and wound complication was also higher in the IS group (31.7%) than that in the S2AI group (3.9%) (p < 0.01).
conclusionIS and S2AI fixations showed that both techniques had similar outcomes in terms of implant failure. However, S2AI was revealed to have better outcomes than IS in terms of revision, screw prominence, and wound complications.
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.