ArticleSpine deformity2025
3D rapid prototyping curve-specific scoliosis model: an affordable approach to reduce medial pedicle screw perforation in the thoracic and lumbar spine.
Article in Spine deformity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to investigate the effect of 3D rapid prototyping(3DRP) curve-specific scoliosis model in pedicle screws placement, and contrast it with standard free-hand techniques.
methodsA retrospective review on scoliosis patients operated on by a single surgeon from 2014 to 2018 identified 48 patients with curve-specific models manufactured by 3DRP and used intra-operatively for guidance of instrumentation. They were age and gender-matched to 48 scoliosis patients in whom pedicle screws were placed following the standard free-hand technique. Screw position was determined on CT by a grading system as Grade 0 (no violation), Grade 1 (< 2 mm perforation), Grade 2 (< 4 mm perforation), or Grade 3 (> 4 mm perforation).
results1485 screws (686 in the 3DRP group vs. 799 in the control group) were analyzed. Patients in the 3DRP group had higher Cobb angles and more challenging deformity. Although the overall percentages of critical perforations (those with risk of complications) were comparable between the two groups, the distribution of screw perforation were different. Screws in the 3DRP group were less likely to be critical both medially and laterally, and more likely to be critical anteriorly. Furthermore, laterally and anteriorly, the difference between them were largely due to a difference in Grade 2 perforation, whereas medially, the difference resulted from a higher percentage of both Grade 2 and Grade 3 perforation.
conclusion3DRP scoliosis model represents an affordable and accessible approach to reduce medial pedicle screw perforation with high risk of complications in the thoracic and lumbar spine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40434622What 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.