ArticleCureus2024
Navigation-Guided C-arm-Free Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparative Study of Cage Orientation and Screw Insertion Accuracy Against the Conventional C-arm-Assisted Technique.
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.
- Article
- Comprehensive workflow with optical navigation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is a widely utilized technique in spine surgery. This study compares the efficacy and safety of MIS-TLIF performed with traditional C-arm fluoroscopy and C-arm-free O-arm navigation. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to compare cage positioning between C-arm-free and C-arm techniques for MIS- TLIF.
methodsA retrospective, comparative analysis was conducted on 43 patients undergoing MIS-TLIF. The group was divided based on the utilization of C-arm fluoroscopy or C-arm-free O-arm navigation. Key parameters analyzed included cage orientation, screw insertion accuracy, operative efficiency, and postoperative recovery. Radiographic measurements were used to assess surgical precision and perioperative complications were documented.
resultsThe study encompassed 43 patients, with no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the two groups. Surgical time and blood loss were comparable between C-arm-free and C-arm groups. O-arm navigation significantly reduced pedicle screw misplacement (p=0.024). Cage positioning differed between groups (p=0.0063): O-arm cages were mostly mid-center, while C-arm cages were more anterior-center. Such differences in the cage location did not cause any impact on clinical outcome. No significant differences were observed in postoperative complications (screw loosenings, dural tears, surgical site infections) between groups. The Oswestry Disability Index scores at the final follow-up showed no significant difference between the O-arm and C-arm groups, indicating similar levels of postoperative disability.
conclusionDespite the clinically insignificant difference in cage placement between C-arm-free and C-arm dependent, C-arm-free MIS-TLIF significantly improves screw placement accuracy and reduces radiation exposure to operating stuff. This suggests its potential as a valuable tool for safer and more precise spinal fusion surgery.
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.