ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Cortical bone trajectory versus cement-augmented pedicle screws in osteoporotic lumbar surgery: 24-month patient-reported outcomes and recorded complications.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCement-augmented pedicle screws (CPSCA) and cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws are used to enhance the fixation strength in osteoporotic bone, but direct comparative clinical evidence remains limited. This study compared 24-month patient-reported outcomes, hospital stay, and complication profiles after CBT versus CPSCA instrumentation in osteoporotic patients undergoing lumbar fixation with interbody fusion.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 134 patients with a bone mineral density T-score < - 2.5 who underwent one- to four-level lumbar fixation with interbody fusion between 2015 and 2021 (CPSCA, n = 63; CBT, n = 71). Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were assessed preoperatively and at a standardized 24-month clinical assessment, conducted in outpatient clinics or by structured telephone follow-up. Primary multivariable models adjusted for age and number of fusion levels. Expanded sensitivity models additionally incorporated sex, bone mineral density, baseline outcome severity, surgical year, and radiographic follow-up duration where applicable. Complications, reoperations, and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) responder rates were also compared.
resultsAt 24 months, CBT was associated with comparative VAS improvement than CPSCA (adjusted β = 13.39% points, p < 0.001), comparative ODI improvement (adjusted β = 8.53% points, p = 0.003), and shorter hospital stay (adjusted β = -3.00 days, p = 0.020). These associations remained statistically significant in expanded sensitivity analyses. All CBT patients met the predefined MCID thresholds for VAS and ODI, compared with 90.5% and 87.3% of CPSCA patients, respectively; the exact 95% confidence interval for each 100% CBT responder rate was 94.9-100.0%. Recorded perioperative complications occurred in 5 of 63 CPSCA patients (7.9%) and 4 of 71 CBT patients (5.6%; p = 0.734), while reoperation rates were 7.9% and 5.6%, respectively (p = 0.734). Cement leakage occurred only after CPSCA, whereas screw loosening occurred only after CBT. No individual complication differed significantly between groups.
conclusionIn this retrospective cohort, CBT instrumentation was associated with comparative 24-month improvement in pain and disability and shorter hospitalization than CPSCA after adjustment for measured covariates. Complication and reoperation rates did not differ statistically, although complication patterns varied between techniques. Because treatment allocation was non-randomised, surgeon and instrumentation effects could not be separated, and the study was underpowered for uncommon adverse events, these findings require cautious interpretation and prospective validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42530598What 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.