ArticleJournal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery2026
Evaluating Three-Dimensional Navigation versus Conventional Fluoroscopy for Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: An Exploratory Cohort Comparison.
Article in Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Unilateral monosegmental radiculopathy, caused by foraminal soft disc nerve root compression, can be treated with posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF). Conventional fluoroscopy is widely used for level localization and verifying decompression extent intraoperatively. However, the failure rate increases, especially in obese patients and the lower cervical spine. Can intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) navigation improve outcomes in PCF compared with conventional fluoroscopy? Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed two groups: 42 patients (mean age: 54 ± 10 years) who underwent PCF using intraoperative 3D navigation (study group) and 63 patients (mean age: 51 ± 11 years) who underwent PCF with conventional fluoroscopy (control group). Each cohort was divided into upper (C3-C6) and lower cervical spine (C6-T1) subgroups. Differences were explored by Mann-Whitney U and Friedman tests. Results: Both groups experienced significant postoperative symptom improvement, with no significant neurological differences. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences between surgeries in the upper (C3-C6) and lower (C6-T1) cervical spine. Only blood loss in the C3-C6 group differed significantly between control and study groups. Conclusion: Intraoperative 3D navigation was successfully used for PCF, resulting in significant symptom relief. Outcomes after PCF with 3D navigation appeared comparable to those achieved with conventional fluoroscopy, without statistical evidence of a clear advantage. Thus, technical complexity should be considered when selecting the surgical method.
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.