SynthesisSpine deformity2025
Turning the screw: assessing the impact of full power-assisted versus manual pedicle screw insertion in paediatric spine surgery.
Synthesis 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong-level pedicle screw placement involves repetitive, forceful rotational movements that increase the risk of musculoskeletal pain and disorders in spine surgeons. Full power-assisted pedicle screw insertion may mitigate these risks, but its efficacy and safety compared to manual techniques remain underexplored. Understanding these differences is crucial for optimizing surgical practices and improving outcomes.
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the outcomes of full power-assisted versus manual pedicle screw insertion in paediatric spine surgery, focusing on operative time and complications.
methodsA systematic review of English-language literature published up to September 2024 was conducted using the search criteria ("Pedicle Screws"[Mesh]) and (power), adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing full power-assisted and manual pedicle screw insertion were included.
resultsOf 2,559 patients, 1,715 underwent full power-assisted insertion (65.7% female, mean age 14.3 years, mean follow-up 20.8 months), and 844 underwent manual insertion (67.9% female, mean age 14.5 years, mean follow-up 26.9 months). Operative times were comparable (248 vs. 251.4 min, p = 0.69), as were screw breach rates (0.49% vs. 1.42%, p = 0.23). However, manual insertion was associated with a significantly higher rate of other complications compared to full power-assisted techniques (0.077% vs. 0.022%, p = 0.03).
conclusionFull power-assisted pedicle screw insertion is as efficient and accurate as manual techniques, with fewer complications in pedicle screw placement surgery. These findings support the use of power assistance to enhance surgical safety. Further research should validate these results in diverse patient populations and long-term follow-up.
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.