ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
A novel bone screw implantation strategy in C1-2 instability: a framework for evolving high cervical spine surgery.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2026. 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
Fixation surgery for atlantoaxial instability (AAI) or atlantoaxial subluxation is recognized as a complex and high-risk procedure, prompting the development of various fixation techniques. In this preliminary study, we evaluated the safety and accuracy of C1-2 pedicle screw insertion using our developed planning software and 3D-printed guiding templates. We also analyzed feasibility with free-hand techniques to identify an optimal strategy for atlantoaxial fixation. We used a self-developed 3D planning method, along with guiding template techniques, for pedicle screws in high cervical vertebra fixation. A small cohort of thirteen patients in Group 1 received free-hand screw placement, while seventeen in Group 2 performed using the planning and guiding system. We analyzed demographics, complications, and screw placement precision. We compared the demographics, operative time, and blood loss between the two groups. Complications occurred in patients from Group 1, but none in those from Group 2. Most Group 2 patients underwent the C1 and C2 pedicle screws approach, which showed significantly higher screw placement safety. Both pedicle screws applied in C1 and C2 are preferable to occipitocervical fusion when feasible. The planning strategy and its associated guiding system improve the implanted screws precision and safety of pedicle screw placement, particularly in cases with high-riding vertebral arteries. When the C2 pedicle diameter exceeds 3 mm, we safely perform the C2 pedicle screws. This method supports more precise preoperative planning for atlantoaxial instability.
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.