ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluation of a novel C2 pedicle screw insertion technique: a retrospective comparative clinical study and finite element analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
C2 pedicle screws (C2PS) are extensively used in the treatment of upper cervical spine disorders owing to their superior mechanical properties. However, incorrect screw insertion in the C2 pedicle can lead to catastrophic consequences due to the proximity to critical structures such as the vertebral artery groove and spinal cord. There is currently no universally accepted method for precise C2PS placement. In this study, we evaluated a novel free-hand C2PS insertion technique that uses the superior margin of the C2 lamina and the medial margin of the C2 pedicle as landmarks, thereby avoiding routine exposure of the C2/C3 facet joint capsule. Compared with the traditional Harms technique, the novel method reduced the transverse screw angle and sagittal screw angle, which may facilitate screw insertion in a limited operative field. The overall rate of pedicle breach was not significantly increased. Finite element analysis further showed comparable fixation strength between the two techniques in the modeled normal C2 anatomy. In summary, for anatomically suitable C2 pedicles, the novel C2PS insertion technique provided comparable radiographic accuracy and similar biomechanical stability to the Harms technique, while requiring smaller insertion angles and less lateral exposure.
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.