ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2024
Accuracy and safety of freehand vs. end-on fluoroscopic guided drill-hole placement in canine cadaveric thoracic, lumbar and sacral vertebrae.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 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.
- Comparative analysis of accuracy and safety in guided versus freehand lateral-to-medial humeral transcondylar drilling.Veterinary surgery : VS · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive percutaneous cannulated polyaxial screw and rod fixation thoracolumbar and lumbosacral vertebrae: cadaveric evaluation of accuracy and safety of a fluoroscopic-guided technique, in large breed dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and evaluate the safety and accuracy of an open, end-on fluoroscopic guided (EOFG) drill hole position technique in canine cadaveric spinal surgery, in comparison to a traditional free-hand (FH) drilling technique. Study design: Cadaveric comparison study. Animals: Canine cadaveric vertebral columns ( Methods: Computed tomography (CT) scans were performed for Results: Drill hole safety was categorized as optimal (modified Zdichavsky classification 1) in 51/60 (85%) of drill holes using EOFG and 33/60 (55%) using FH ( Conclusion: Optimal drill hole placement was significantly more likely with the EOFG technique and improved the accuracy of bone purchase in the thoracic region. Clinical significance: The EOFG technique shows promise for translation into a clinically setting, potentially improving implant purchase and therefore stabilizing construct strength, whilst potentially reducing the likelihood of neurovascular injury and need for surgical revision.
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.