ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
Evaluation of preoperative screw planning and X-ray simulation for iliosacral and transsacral screw placement.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe percutaneous placement of iliosacral (IS) and transsacral (TS) screws has become a standard practice for the treatment of pelvic fractures. Due to the complex sacral anatomy, accurate screw placement is essential to avoid complications, such as neurovascular injury. The goal of this study was to quantify the deviation between planned and executed screw trajectories and to identify associated factors.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study on treating 51 patients with pelvic fractures from August 2021 to December 2023, using a total of 95 IS and TS screws. Preoperative planning was performed to generate a volume-rendered reconstruction that replicates standard intraoperative fluoroscopic views (lateral, inlet, outlet). These simulated images served as references during surgery. Postoperative Computed Tomography (CT) data were integrated with the preoperative plan to quantify screw deviations through accuracy metrics.
resultsMedian deviation from the planned entry point was 8.8 mm (6.2-12.8) for IS and 6.2 mm (4.2-9.0) for TS. Average distances were 5.7 mm (3.5-8.0) for IS and 4.8 mm ± 2.0 for TS. Angle deviation was 8.2° (4.6-12.8) for IS and 3.9° ± 1.8 for TS. One patient experienced loss of sensibility due to an IS screw conflicting with the L5 nerve root, needing revision surgery. A positive association was observed between BMI and the distance between entry points for TS screws. Learning curve analysis showed no significant change in accuracy over time.
conclusionPreoperative navigation using volume-rendered virtual imaging could not guarantee a precise positioning of IS and TS screws. Although geometric deviations were observed between planned and placed screws, clinical outcomes were favourable, with a very low complication rate. The technique proved feasible and safe in clinical practice, achieving moderate overall accuracy, and may therefore be particularly valuable for less-experienced surgeons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42090041What 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.