We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of cortical bone trajectory and traditional trajectory pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a randomized controlled trial.
European Spine Journal 2024 January 23
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes and radiographic outcomes of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) and traditional trajectory (TT) pedicle screw fixation in patients treated with single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).
METHODS: This trial included a total of 224 patients with lumbar spine disease who required single-level TLIF surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to the CBT and TT groups at a 1:1 ratio. Demographics and clinical and radiographic data were collected to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CBT and TT screw fixation in TLIF.
RESULTS: The baseline characteristic data were similar between the CBT and TT groups. Back and leg pain for both the CBT and TT groups improved significantly from baseline to 24 months postoperatively. The CBT group experienced less pain than the TT group at one week postoperatively. The postoperative radiographic results showed that the accuracy of screw placement was significantly increased in the CBT group compared with the TT group (P < 0.05). The CBT group had a significantly lower rate of FJV than the TT group (P < 0.05). In addition, the rate of fusion and the rate of screw loosening were similar between the CBT and TT groups according to screw loosening criteria.
CONCLUSION: This prospective, randomized controlled analysis suggests that clinical outcomes and radiographic characteristics, including fusion rates and caudal screw loosening rates, were comparable between CBT and TT screw fixation. Compared with the TT group, the CBT group showed advantages in the accuracy of screw placement and the FJV rate.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered at the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry: NCT03105167.
METHODS: This trial included a total of 224 patients with lumbar spine disease who required single-level TLIF surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to the CBT and TT groups at a 1:1 ratio. Demographics and clinical and radiographic data were collected to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CBT and TT screw fixation in TLIF.
RESULTS: The baseline characteristic data were similar between the CBT and TT groups. Back and leg pain for both the CBT and TT groups improved significantly from baseline to 24 months postoperatively. The CBT group experienced less pain than the TT group at one week postoperatively. The postoperative radiographic results showed that the accuracy of screw placement was significantly increased in the CBT group compared with the TT group (P < 0.05). The CBT group had a significantly lower rate of FJV than the TT group (P < 0.05). In addition, the rate of fusion and the rate of screw loosening were similar between the CBT and TT groups according to screw loosening criteria.
CONCLUSION: This prospective, randomized controlled analysis suggests that clinical outcomes and radiographic characteristics, including fusion rates and caudal screw loosening rates, were comparable between CBT and TT screw fixation. Compared with the TT group, the CBT group showed advantages in the accuracy of screw placement and the FJV rate.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered at the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry: NCT03105167.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app