ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2025
Optimal trajectory for the anterior occipital condyle screw.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2025. 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.
- How I do it: Condylar screws.Acta neurochirurgica · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the practicality and optimal approach for inserting an anterior occipital condyle screw, as well as to measure the screw placement characteristics.MethodsA total of 80 normal head and cervical spine computed tomography scans (40 males/40 females) were used to construct three-dimensional models. The average age of the participants was 45.18 ± 8.86 years (ranging from 25 to 65 years). Three potential entry points for the anterior occipital condyle screw were identified. A simulated screw with a radius of 1.75 mm was created to replicate the screw trajectory and adjusted to establish the maximum and minimum cranial limits for each entry point. The feasibility of screw fixation was assessed, identifying the optimal entry point and analyzing relevant screw placement measurements.ResultsThe success rates for screw placement were 95.6%, 94.4%, and 88.1% for the middle, lateral, and medial entry points, respectively. The success rate for the medial entry point was notably lower than that for the middle and lateral points. No statistically significant differences were found in the measured parameters between the left and right sides. The medial entry point exhibited the highest abduction angulation (35.72° ± 2.01°) for screw placement, followed by the middle (25.96° ± 1.86°) and lateral (15.14° ± 1.82°) points. The middle and lateral entry points displayed a considerably wider safe range of cranial angulation and screw placement length than the medial entry point. All three entry points achieved success rates exceeding 90% when the cranial angulation ranged from 2° to 6°.ConclusionThe anterior occipital condyle screw presents a workable choice for anterior craniovertebral fixation. The middle entry point is identified as the optimal approach for placing 3.5-mm diameter screws.
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.