Cervical Pedicle Screws: Multicenter Comparison of Freehand, Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Templates, Loop-X Navigation and OARM/CT Navigation Accuracy and Safety

Study DesignRetrospective comparative study.ObjectiveThis multicenter European study aimed to compare the accuracy, complication rates, and incidence of revision surgery associated with three distinct cervical pedicle screw (CPS) insertion techniques: freehand, navigation-assisted (Loop-X/O-arm), and patient-specific 3D-template guided approaches. The primary endpoint was to provide evidence to support decision-making in cervical spine instrumentation.MethodsA retrospective, observational study analyzed prospectively collected data from 97 adult patients who underwent posterior cervical fusion with CPS between January 2019 and August 2024. Screw accuracy was assessed using intraoperative or postoperative CT scans, according to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were systematically evaluated.ResultsA total of 369 CPS were implanted, with an overall accuracy (Grade A/B) of 90.7%. Patient-specific 3D-templates yielded the highest accuracy (97.7% of grade A/B screws), significantly superior to navigation-assisted (85.5%) and freehand (80.0%) techniques (<i>P</i> < .001). The lowest accuracy was observed at the C2 level (79.4%; <i>P</i> < .001). Patients over 60 years of age undergoing surgery at the C2 level had a 4.7-fold increased likelihood of suboptimal (Grade > B) screw placement (<i>P</i> = .016). The overall rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications was significantly higher in the freehand and navigation-assisted groups (<i>P</i> < .05).ConclusionCPSs are safe and effective for cervical fusion, with acceptable complication rates. Patient-specific 3D templates offer superior accuracy and fewer complications, but its applicability is limited in urgent cases. Navigation provides good accuracy, but is associated with higher costs and potential technical inconveniences. Technique selection should consider surgeon expertise, resources, and patient-specific factors.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Global Spine Journal
Published
2025-08-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682251366645
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.01
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cervical Pedicle Screws: Multicenter Comparison of Freehand, Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Templates, Loop-X Navigation and OARM/CT Navigation Accuracy and Safety

Andrej von Schilling, Alberto Morello, Marco Ajello, Uwe Spetzger et al.
2 citations
Global Spine Journal
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
4.01
article

Cervical Pedicle Screws: Multicenter Comparison of Freehand, Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Templates, Loop-X Navigation and OARM/CT Navigation Accuracy and Safety

Andrej von Schilling, Alberto Morello, Marco Ajello, Uwe Spetzger, Luca Ceroni, Pierre Guigui, Marc Khalifé, Diego Garbossa, Emmanuelle Ferrero, Fabio Cofano, Léonard Chatelain, Alberto Balagna, Augusto Leone, Stefano Colonna, Nicola Marengo, Francesco Carbone, Tommaso Da Rin Vidal
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Study DesignRetrospective comparative study.ObjectiveThis multicenter European study aimed to compare the accuracy, complication rates, and incidence of revision surgery associated with three distinct cervical pedicle screw (CPS) insertion techniques: freehand, navigation-assisted (Loop-X/O-arm), and patient-specific 3D-template guided approaches. The primary endpoint was to provide evidence to support decision-making in cervical spine instrumentation.MethodsA retrospective, observational study analyzed prospectively collected data from 97 adult patients who underwent posterior cervical fusion with CPS between January 2019 and August 2024. Screw accuracy was assessed using intraoperative or postoperative CT scans, according to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were systematically evaluated.ResultsA total of 369 CPS were implanted, with an overall accuracy (Grade A/B) of 90.7%. Patient-specific 3D-templates yielded the highest accuracy (97.7% of grade A/B screws), significantly superior to navigation-assisted (85.5%) and freehand (80.0%) techniques (<i>P</i> < .001). The lowest accuracy was observed at the C2 level (79.4%; <i>P</i> < .001). Patients over 60 years of age undergoing surgery at the C2 level had a 4.7-fold increased likelihood of suboptimal (Grade > B) screw placement (<i>P</i> = .016). The overall rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications was significantly higher in the freehand and navigation-assisted groups (<i>P</i> < .05).ConclusionCPSs are safe and effective for cervical fusion, with acceptable complication rates. Patient-specific 3D templates offer superior accuracy and fewer complications, but its applicability is limited in urgent cases. Navigation provides good accuracy, but is associated with higher costs and potential technical inconveniences. Technique selection should consider surgeon expertise, resources, and patient-specific factors.

Global Spine JournalVol. 16(2)
University of Foggia (IT), CTO Hospital (IT), Azienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino (IT), Städtisches Klinikum Karlsruhe (DE), Ospedali Riuniti di Foggia (IT), Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou (FR), Hôpital Européen (FR), University of Turin (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
4.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.