ArticleActa neurochirurgica2025
Minimally invasive pedicle screw placement with image-guided navigation in cervical spine injuries.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMIS pedicle screw placement is a novel technique for the management of unstable injuries of the cervical spine. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of MIS pedicle screw placement and to compare perioperative, postoperative and radiological outcomes between MIS and conventional open approaches.
methodsThis single-centre cohort study included patients with unstable injuries of the cervical spine treated with open approaches for pedicle or lateral mass screw fixation or MIS approaches for pedicle screw fixation. Perioperative and postoperative variables were compared. All screw positions were classified according to the Bredow classification.
resultsTwenty patients with unstable injuries of the cervical spine were included, 10 undergoing conventional open posterior fixation (87 screws) and 10 undergoing MIS cervical pedicle screw fixation (48 screws). In the MIS group, significantly fewer vertebrae were instrumented (2.4 vs. 4.5; p = 0.008) and significantly fewer screws placed (4.8 vs. 8.7; p = 0.009). Operative time was significantly shorter in patients operated with MIS approach (183 vs. 132 min; p = 0.020). Also, there was a significant reduction in blood loss per surgery in patients operated with a MIS approach compared to an open approach (145 vs. 891 ml; p = 0.002). Out of 87 pedicle and lateral mass screws placed with an open approach 99% were classified as Bredow grade 1 or 2. All 48 screws placed with a MIS approach were rated as Bredow grade 1 or 2.
conclusionsThis feasibility study provides preliminary evidence that surgery with MIS approach with navigated pedicle screws may be associated with reduced length of surgery and intraoperative blood loss compared to open surgery. Radiological evaluation of screw placement showed a good positioning with both open and minimally invasive approach. The results highlight the need for further investigation in larger, controlled trials to more rigorously evaluate the potential benefits and risks of this approach.
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.