ArticleCureus2024
Mixed Reality-Based Navigation for Pedicle Screw Placement: A Preliminary Study Using a 3D-Printed Spine Model.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary evaluation of mixed reality navigation with single-vertebra registration in spinal surgery.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Wearable Devices in Scoliosis Treatment: A Scoping Review of Innovations and Challenges.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Innovative Pedicle Screw Insertion with Mixed Reality Technology Improves Insertion Accuracy in Spinal Surgery.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives Mixed reality (MR) is one of the image processing technologies that allows the user to manipulate three-dimensional (3D) virtual images (hologram). The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of MR-based pedicle screw (PS) placement using 3D spine models. Materials and methods Using the preoperative CT data of a patient with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who had undergone posterior spinal fusion in our hospital, a 3D-printed spine model was created. On the other hand, a 3D hologram of the same patient was automatically created using the preoperative CT data uploaded to the Holoeyes MD service website (Holoeyes Inc., Tokyo, Japan). Using a Magic Leap One® headset (Magic Leap Inc., Plantation, FL), the 3D hologram with lines of predetermined PS trajectories was superimposed onto the 3D-printed spine model and PS were inserted bilaterally along with the trajectory lines from T5 to L3. As a control, we used a readymade 3D spine model of AIS and inserted PS bilaterally with a freehand technique from T4 to L3. The rate of pedicle violation was compared between the MR-based and freehand techniques. Results A total of 22 and 24 PS were placed into the 3D-printed spine model of our patient and the readymade 3D spine model, respectively. The rate of pedicle violation was 4.5% (1/22 screws) in the MR-based technique and 29.2% (7/24 screws) in the freehand technique (P = 0.049). Conclusions We demonstrated a significantly lower rate of PS misplacement in the MR-based technique than in the freehand technique. Therefore, an MR-assisted system is a promising tool for PS placement in terms of feasibility, safety, and accuracy, warranting further studies including cadaveric and clinical studies.
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.