ArticleCureus2024
Radiation Exposure During Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Can Be Reduced by Using a Three-Dimensional Patient-Specific Template Guide.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Clinical and radiological evaluation of cortical bone trajectory screw placement using patient-specific 3D templates: a multicentric prospective study.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
- Are Patient-Specific 3-Dimensionally Printed Instrumentations a Viable Solution to Safe Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement? A Systematic Review.International journal of spine surgery · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of posterior lumber interbody fusion (PLIF) using cortical bone trajectory (CBT) with a patient-specific 3D template guide is increasingly widespread. To our knowledge, no studies have extensively evaluated the reduction of radiation exposure when using patient-specific drill template guides. The purpose of this study is to compare the intra-operative radiation dose and surgeon's exposure to radiation in CBT-PLIF when using a patient-specific drill guide with that in traditional minimally invasive (MIS)-PLIF.
methodsIn this observational study, we retrospectively compared data from five patients who were treated with single-level CBT-PLIF using a patient-specific drill guide (G group) and five patients who were treated with single-level traditional MIS-PLIF (M group). We compared the surgical time, surgeon's exposure to radiation, and intra-operative radiation time and dose between the two groups of patients.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 67.0 years in the M group and 74.2 years in the G group. The average surgical time was 242.8 min in the M group and 189.6 min in the G group (p = 0.020). The surgeon's exposure to radiation was 373.7 µSv in the M group and 81.75 µSv in the G group at chest level outside the protector (p = 0.00092); 42.0 µSv (M group) and 3.6 µSv (G group) at chest level inside the protector (p = 0.0000062); and 4.33 µSv (M group) and 1.20 µSv (G group) at the buttocks of the surgeon (p = 0.0013). Radiation time was 269.8 s (M group) and 56.6 s (G group) (p = 0.0097), and radiation dose was 153.7 mGy (M group) and 30.42 mGy (G group) (p = 0.00057).
conclusionThe patient-specific drill template guide is an invaluable tool that facilitates the safe insertion of CBT screws with a low radiation dose from the outset.
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.