ArticleBMC veterinary research2026
A comparative study of fluoroscopy-guided closed reduction with 3D-printed guide-assisted cannulated screw fixation versus open surgery with a lag screw fixation in 32 cats with sacroiliac luxation-fracture.
Article in BMC veterinary 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis prospective study aims to compare the clinical, radiographic, and computed tomographic (CT) findings of minimally invasive closed fluoroscopy-asisted reduction and cannulated screw fixation (MCF) versus open reduction (OR) with lag screws in cats with sacroiliac luxation (SIL).
methodsThirty-two cats with SIL were divided into two groups: MCF (n = 16) and OR (n = 16). In the MCF group, reduction was performed via a minimally invasive (MI) approach using fluoroscopy and a custom-made 3D K-wire guide, with stabilisation achieved using a 2.7 mm partially threaded cannulated screw. In the OR group, reduction was performed via an open approach, and stabilisation was achieved using a lag screw. Clinical, radiographic, and CT evaluations were performed for all cases.
resultsThe MCF group demonstrated significantly shorter surgical duration (p < 0.001) and an earlier return to limb function compared to the OR group (p < 0.001). Lameness scores were significantly lower in the MCF group during the first two postoperative weeks (p < 0.001). Radiographically, the MCF group achieved significantly better restoration of the pelvic canal diameter ratio (PCDR) (Mean Difference = 0.091, 95% CI: 0.021-0.161, p = 0.012) and sacroiliac joint reduction ratio (SRO) (Mean Difference = 12.0, 95% CI: 5.76-18.20, p < 0.001). Although radiation exposure was higher in the MCF group (p < 0.05), the complication rate was significantly lower (18.8%) compared to the OR group (62.5%) (p = 0.029). The dorsoventral screw angle (DVA) (p = 0.012) and craniocaudal screw angle (CCA) (p = 0.632) were lower in the MCF group than in the OR group.
conclusionAccording to the results of this study the MCF technique using a guide is associated with shorter surgery duration, better anatomic reduction, fewer post-operative complications and faster recovery times. However, it does not seem to be a viable technique for delayed SIL cases in cats.
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.