ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2024
Feline sacroiliac luxation: comparison of fluoroscopy-controlled freehand vs. computer-navigated drilling in the sacrum-a cadaveric study.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Minimally invasive computer-assisted repair of feline sacroiliac luxation-a cadaveric study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
Introduction: Sacroiliac luxation is a common traumatic feline injury, with the small size of the sacral body being a challenge for surgical stabilization. This study compared an innovative computer-guided drilling method with the conventional fluoroscopy-controlled freehand technique. Neuronavigation, using CT-based planning and real-time tracking, was evaluated against the freehand method for accuracy and time efficiency. Materials and methods: Bilateral sacroiliac luxation was induced in 20 feline cadavers. One side of the sacral body was drilled using fluoroscopy, and the other with neuronavigation (Stealth Station S8). A reference frame was affixed to the sacral spinous process for tracking. Ten cats were operated on by an ECVS diplomate and 10 by a resident. Postoperative cone beam CT images were used to assess both techniques, comparing the accuracy of the planned corridor vs. the actual drill hole in the sacrum. A learning curve for both methods was estimated by measuring procedure time. Results: CT scan assessments showed all 40 drill holes achieved "surgically satisfactory" results. The computer-navigated technique demonstrated an average deviation of 1.9 mm (SD 1.0 mm) at the entry point and 1.6 mm (SD 0.8 mm) at the exit point. The pins of 3/20 reference frames penetrated the vertebral canal, creating a risk for potential clinical complications. The neuronavigation-guided procedures took an average of 23 min and 37 s (SD 8 min 34 s), significantly longer than the freehand technique, which averaged 9 min and 47 s (SD 3 min 26 s). A steep learning curve was observed with neuronavigation. Discussion: The neuronavigation-guided technique achieved accuracy is comparable to the fluoroscopy-controlled method, is offering real-time feedback and has potential for highly precise surgeries near critical anatomical structures. However, significant attention must be given to the placement of the reference frame, as it is placed blindly and presents a potential risk for errors and complications. Despite its longer duration, the neuronavigation method shows promise for improving precision in complex surgical scenarios.
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.