ArticleMedicine international
The Attallah screw: Where safety meets robustness in posterior subaxial cervical instrumentation.
Article in Medicine international. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Posterior fixation of the subaxial cervical spine (SCS) commonly relies on the application of lateral mass screws (LMS), with pedicle screws being a less prevalent alternative. The present study provides another option: A recently introduced novel approach, the Attallah screw, intended to ensure a safety profile comparable to that of LMS, combined with a strength profile similar to that of pedicle screws. The focus of the present study is the comparative analysis of peak insertion torques for these three screw types. Employing standard surgical techniques and instruments, Attallah screws were scheduled for insertion on the right side of the SCS in 15 cadavers, pedicle screws on the left side in 8 cadavers, and LMS on the left side in the remaining 7 cadavers. The peak insertion torque was recorded using an electronic torque screwdriver. The results revealed that the peak insertion torques were similar in the pedicle and the Attallah screw at C3, C4 and C7, but differed at C5 (mean ± SD; pedicle, 79.5±19.6 cNm; Attallah, 56.7±18.5 cNm; P=0.029) and C6 (pedicle, 85.4±28.7 cNm; Attallah, 49.8±17.9 cNm; P=0.004) in favor of the superior pedicle screw measurements. The peak insertion torques of the pedicle screw were superior to the corresponding data from the LMS from C4 to C7. By contrast, the peak insertion torques of the Attallah screw were only superior to those of the LMS at C7 (Attallah, 69.5±24.5 cNm; lateral mass, 40.5±21.4 cNm; P=0.030), although similar trends were observed at the other cervical levels. On the whole, the findings presented herein indicate the level-dependent superior robustness of the Attallah screw as a posterior cervical fixation method compared to the LMS. However, from a biomechanical perspective, the pedicle screw remains the preeminent choice for fixation within the C5-C6 range.
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.