Clinical Accuracy of Cervicothoracic Pedicle Screw Placement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Posterior transpedicular fixation at the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) is increasing in popularity. However, the clinical accuracy of pedicle screw placement at the CTJ has not been specifically assessed. METHODS: Between January 2000 and July 2004, 60 consecutive patients underwent a variety of posterior spinal procedures necessitating pedicle screw placement at C7, T1, and T2. Thirty-two patients had cervicothoracic screws (3.5 to 4.5 mm) placed by an "open" technique (laminectomies or lamino-foraminotomies) and 28 patients with either a closed (before any decompression) 2-dimensional (n=19, fluoroscopy) or 3-dimensional (n=9, CT) computer-assisted technique. Screws were independently assessed for pedicle breach on postoperative CT and scored using a points-based classification system. RESULTS: The total number of screws placed was 86, 63 and 45 in the open, closed-2-dimensional and closed-3-dimensional groups, respectively. Overall, 61(70.9%), 51(81%), and 40(89%) screws were completely within the pedicle. In the open group, the majority of pedicle breaches were more than 2 mm [n=3 (<2 mm), n=20 (2-4 mm), n=2 (>4 mm)]. Screw violation occurred laterally 11/25(44%), medially 3/25(12%), inferiorly 7/25(28%), and superiorly 4/25(16%). In the closed technique, all breaches were lateral. Seventeen screws (n=11-2-dimensional, n=5-3-dimensional) breached the pedicle by a margin of less than 2 mm and 1 screw (2-dimensional) by 2 to 4 mm. Pedicle screw accuracy was significantly improved with computer-assisted techniques. However, there was no significant difference between the 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional techniques. For all patients, there were no clinically significant screw misplacements, nor any need for screw revision. CONCLUSIONS: Computer-assisted surgery allows for more accurate placement of pedicle screws at the CTJ. Although a higher proportion of major pedicular breaches occurred in the "open lamina/lamino-foraminotomy" group, no screws required revision in either group.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".