Article3D printing in medicine2026
Mixed-reality, heads-up navigation for percutaneous pedicle screw placement: a prospective accuracy and workflow study.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 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
backgroundMixed-reality (MR) head-mounted navigation projects a three-dimensional hologram of the patient's spine directly into the surgeon's field of view, potentially enhancing the precision and speed of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation. High-quality prospective data comparing MR with conventional fluoroscopy are scarce, prompting the present randomized study.
resultsSixty-one adults (274 screws) were allocated to MR (30 patients, 136 screws) or fluoroscopy (31 patients, 138 screws). MR navigation yielded a greater proportion of accurately placed screws (96.3% vs. 89.9%; absolute difference 6.4%; p = 0.04) and shortened mean operative time by 28 min (83 ± 11 min vs. 111 ± 14 min; p < 0.001). Entry-point, angular and depth deviations were all significantly smaller with MR, while intra-operative fluoroscopic images fell by 42%. Early complications occurred in 3.3% of MR cases and 16.1% of controls, and holographic pre-operative counselling improved patient understanding and satisfaction (p < 0.001).
conclusionsMR head-mounted navigation is feasible, safe and more precise than fluoroscopic guidance, delivering faster procedures, fewer fluoroscopic shots and a short learning curve. These advantages support MR as a cost-effective next-generation guidance modality for minimally invasive spine surgery.
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.