ReviewCureus2025
Comparative Analysis Between Cortical Bone Trajectory (CBT) Screw Fixation and Traditional Pedicle Screw Fixation in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Preoperative CT-derived Hounsfield unit values and mechanical complications after thoracolumbar or lumbar instrumented fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Bone cement-augmented vs. conventional pedicle screws for osteoporotic lumbar spondylolisthesis: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted fixation with cortical bone trajectory versus conventional pedicle trajectory for short-segment lumbar decompression and fusion surgery: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw fixation has been proposed as an alternative method to pedicle screw (PS) fixation for lumbar instrumented fusion. However, the benefits of this technique remain controversial. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science Advance, ScienceDirect, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane databases from inception to July 22, 2023. Articles were included if they were related to adults undergoing lumbar spine surgery and showed comparative outcomes with cortical bone and traditional PS trajectory. Twenty-three studies with 1,929 patients (833 in the CBT group and 1,096 in the PS group) were systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed. Significantly lower complications in the CS group, including adjacent segment degeneration (p < 0.05) and screw loosening (p < 0.05), were found. Superior facet joint violation was significantly less in the CBT group (p < 0.05). The CBT group had reduced hospital stay (p < 0.05), reduced blood loss (p < 0.05), and shorter operations (p < 0.05). Clinical outcomes at a mean of 18 months (standard deviation (SD): six months) favored the CBT group in leg pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores in some subgroups (p < 0.05). Reoperation was significantly reduced in the CBT group (p < 0.05). Our study indicates that CBT fixation has acceptable outcomes relative to PS fixation and may be advantageous in some respects. Further studies are required to ascertain optimal surgical indications for each method.
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.