ArticleBrain & spine2025
Proximal facet joint violation and breaches after percutaneous insertion of 311 lumbar pedicle screws using the pedicle axis fluoroscopic view.
Article in Brain & spine, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Violation of the non-fused proximal facet joints (PFJ) above instrumentation might be associated with accelerated arthritis and adjacent-segment disease. Standard fluoroscopic views do not allow for an exclusion of PFJ violation and have been associated with high rates of this complication. Research question: We adopted the use of the pedicle axis view (PAV) and investigated our results and potential correlations. Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of cases of percutaneous pedicle screw insertion in the lumbar spine, using the PAV. Various factors were investigated on postoperative CT scans, e.g. presence of PFJ violation, PFJ angles and analysis of breaches. Results: Overall, 311 screws were inserted using the PAV. The percentage of screws that resulted in PFJ violation was 3.7 % (n = 6). Higher PFJ angles played a role with an odds ratio of 1.21 (95 % CI: 1.03-1.43). The majority of the screws (68.1 %) did not cause cortical breaches. Regarding the rates of breaches, 14.9 % were minor cortical breaches and 11.6 % were moderate. 1.9 % of the screws caused severe breaches, but none of those were located medially or inferiorly. None of the observed breaches led to new symptoms or revision. Discussion and conclusion: The adoption of the fluoroscopic PAV for percutaneous lumbar pedicle screws led to low rates of proximal facet joint violation and severe breaches. Moreover, PFJ violation was more prevalent with higher PFJ angles and surgeons should remain vigilant in such cases. None of the observed breaches were clinically relevant.
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.