ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2026
Comparative biomechanical analysis of pedicle screws versus cortical bone trajectory fixation in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis.
Article in European journal of medical research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAnkylosing spondylitis (AS) is an inflammatory rheumatic disease, in which an imbalance between loss and formation of bone can lead to ligamentous calcification or osteoporosis. Patients with severe spinal deformities are typically treated with long-segment pedicle screw (PS) internal fixation after bone resection; however, issues with the operation, such as fracture and screw loosening or pulling out, might arise. For patients with low bone quality, the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) has been suggested and developed.
methodsIn order to cure AS, this study set out to look at the biomechanical reactions to PS and CBT fixation. Preoperative and postoperative three-dimensional spine models were reconstructed. A finite element analysis was performed to simulate the motion of the spine under six conditions: flexion, extension, left lateral bending, right lateral bending, left axial rotation, and right axial rotation. The analysis model predicted the stiffness, T12-S1 range of motion (ROM), and Von Mises stress of the vertebra, screw-rod systems, and ligaments.
resultsAxial stiffness was greater in the PS than in the CBT model, while the PS model performed better than the CBT model in terms of bending stiffness, except for the PS model under extension conditions. Under the conditions of bending, extension, and left and right lateral bending, the stress borne by the screws and rods in the PS model was greater than that in the CBT model; whereas, under the conditions of left and right rotation, the stress borne by the CBT model was greater than that in the PS model. The stress was concentrated at the bone resection level. Calcified ligaments experience significant stress during spinal movement. After implantation of the internal fixation, the stress values of the anterior longitudinal ligament, posterior longitudinal ligament, interspinous ligament, and supraspinous ligament decreased, whereas the stress values of some intervertebral ligaments increased.
conclusionUnder conditions of flexion, extension, and left and right lateral bending, the PS technique provided better biomechanical strength. Whereas, under conditions of left and right rotation, the CBT technique provided better biomechanical strength. Overall, compared to CBT, the current PS technique was sufficiently effective in maintaining spinal fusion stability after bone resection for AS.
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.