ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of accuracy in C1-C2 pedicle screw placement: O-arm, 3D guides, and C-arm fluoroscopy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- C1 pedicle screw placement risks in patients with ponticulus posticus: a CTA retrospective simulation study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive, CT Neuronavigated Posterolateral Pedicle Screw Placement in Upper Cervical Spine: A Retrospective Accuracy and Safety Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- [Experimental study of patient-specific three-dimensional-printed drill guide-assisted CZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of navigation-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided UBE-ULBD in single-level lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- The application of robotic and artificial intelligence technologies in spinal surgery: a review focused on prospects in remote areas of China.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Atlantoaxial Reconstruction: The Artful Evolution of Craniovertebral Junctional Spine Surgery.Neurospine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the accuracy and safety of C1-C2 pedicle screw placement using O-arm navigation, individualized 3D-printed guides, and C-arm fluoroscopy. Clinical data of 47 patients who underwent C1-C2 spinal fixation surgery at our institution between January 2015 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The cohort included 28 males and 19 females, aged 15-59 years (mean age: 46.23 ± 9.97 years). Patients were categorized into three groups based on the screw placement technique: navigation group (11 cases; O-arm S8 navigation system), guide group (15 cases; individualized 3D-printed guides), and fluoroscopy group (21 cases; C-arm fluoroscopy guided by anatomical landmarks). Outcome measures included surgical time, screw placement time, intraoperative blood loss, single-pass screw placement success rate, screw placement accuracy, and complication rate. Surgical Metrics: The Navigation group demonstrated a mean surgical time of 120.72 ± 11.14 min, screw placement time of 20.00 ± 1.09 min, and blood loss of 225.81 ± 25.58 ml. The Guide group reported significantly shorter surgical time (97.46 ± 9.03 min, P < 0.001), shorter screw placement time (15.80 ± 1.93 min, P < 0.001), and reduced blood loss (162.66 ± 18.52 ml, P < 0.001). The Fluoroscopy group showed longer surgical time (121.04 ± 12.81 min) and higher blood loss (239.04 ± 24.54 ml) compared to the other groups. Screw Placement Success and Accuracy: A total of 188 screws were placed (44 in the Navigation group, 60; guide group, and 84; Fluoroscopy group). The single-pass success rates were 100% (44/44) in the navigation group, 93.3% (56/60) in the guide group, and 80.9% (68/84) in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.002). Screw placement accuracy was 100% (44/44) in the navigation group, 98.3% (59/60) in the guide group, and 85.7% (72/84) in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.039). Notably, three screws in the fluoroscopy group breached the vertebral artery foramen; however, no cerebrovascular ischemic events were observed. Complications: Two patients in the fluoroscopy group developed postoperative occipitocervical pain owing to intraoperative irritation of the C2 nerve root. Symptoms resolved after corticosteroid and diuretic therapy. No occipitocervical pain or other complications were reported in the Navigation or Guide group. All the incisions healed without infection or delayed recovery. O-arm S8 navigation system and individualized guide plate assisted atlantoaxial screw placement can achieve high and stable accuracy, which is better than the traditional freehand screw placement technique under fluoroscopy; O-arm navigation technology has an advantage in the one-time success rate of atlantoaxial screw placement, which is higher than that of the guide plate group and the fluoroscopy group; Individualized guide plate combined with lateral fluoroscopy can accurately place atlantoaxial screws, save operation time and reduce bleeding.
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.