Agreement Between Automated Pedicle Screw Planning and Surgeon-Selected Implant Dimensions in Thoracic and Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Three-Year Single-Center Study

Background: Automated pedicle screw planning (ASP) can initialize trajectories and implant dimensions, but correlation with implanted screws does not establish agreement. We quantified the association and agreement between ASP recommendations and actual intraoperative implant selection (AIS) and examined pathology, asymmetric planning, and available safety outcomes. Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 103 consecutive patients treated with thoracic or lumbar instrumentation from January 2021 to January 2024. The dataset contained 351 bilateral screw-pair records. Pearson and Spearman correlations, linear regression, and Bland–Altman analyses were supplemented by patient-clustered bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CIs), pathology-stratified estimates, and a sensitivity analysis excluding a verified 94 mm iliac-fixation observation. Results: Diameter showed moderate correlation (Pearson’s r = 0.635, 95% CI 0.542–0.721; Spearman’s rho = 0.679, 95% CI 0.554–0.767; both p < 0.001). Length also showed moderate correlation (Pearson’s r = 0.675, 95% CI 0.565–0.754; Spearman’s rho = 0.600, 95% CI 0.450–0.714; both p < 0.001). For ASP minus AIS, the diameter bias was −0.75 mm (95% CI −0.86 to −0.64), with limits of agreement from −2.00 to 0.50 mm. The length bias was −0.15 mm (95% CI −1.05 to 0.79), with limits from −12.30 to 12.00 mm. The 94 mm value was verified as a genuine iliac-fixation observation; excluding it changed Pearson’s r only from 0.675 to 0.679. Asymmetric ASP length recommendations occurred in 115/351 pairs (32.8%), usually by 5 mm. Conclusions: ASP tracked overall implant-size trends but did not provide interchangeable estimates of surgeon-selected dimensions. Its systematic diameter underestimation and broad pair-level differences support its use as an initialization and review aid, with final sizing retained as a surgeon decision.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2026-07-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15155804
Primary Topic
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Agreement Between Automated Pedicle Screw Planning and Surgeon-Selected Implant Dimensions in Thoracic and Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Three-Year Single-Center Study

Mihail-Lucian Stefan, Shadi Al–Afif, Franz‐Josef Hans, Sami Ridwan et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
article

Agreement Between Automated Pedicle Screw Planning and Surgeon-Selected Implant Dimensions in Thoracic and Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Three-Year Single-Center Study

Mihail-Lucian Stefan, Shadi Al–Afif, Franz‐Josef Hans, Sami Ridwan, Joachim K. Krauss, Laura Herkner
article en

Abstract

Background: Automated pedicle screw planning (ASP) can initialize trajectories and implant dimensions, but correlation with implanted screws does not establish agreement. We quantified the association and agreement between ASP recommendations and actual intraoperative implant selection (AIS) and examined pathology, asymmetric planning, and available safety outcomes. Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 103 consecutive patients treated with thoracic or lumbar instrumentation from January 2021 to January 2024. The dataset contained 351 bilateral screw-pair records. Pearson and Spearman correlations, linear regression, and Bland–Altman analyses were supplemented by patient-clustered bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CIs), pathology-stratified estimates, and a sensitivity analysis excluding a verified 94 mm iliac-fixation observation. Results: Diameter showed moderate correlation (Pearson’s r = 0.635, 95% CI 0.542–0.721; Spearman’s rho = 0.679, 95% CI 0.554–0.767; both p < 0.001). Length also showed moderate correlation (Pearson’s r = 0.675, 95% CI 0.565–0.754; Spearman’s rho = 0.600, 95% CI 0.450–0.714; both p < 0.001). For ASP minus AIS, the diameter bias was −0.75 mm (95% CI −0.86 to −0.64), with limits of agreement from −2.00 to 0.50 mm. The length bias was −0.15 mm (95% CI −1.05 to 0.79), with limits from −12.30 to 12.00 mm. The 94 mm value was verified as a genuine iliac-fixation observation; excluding it changed Pearson’s r only from 0.675 to 0.679. Asymmetric ASP length recommendations occurred in 115/351 pairs (32.8%), usually by 5 mm. Conclusions: ASP tracked overall implant-size trends but did not provide interchangeable estimates of surgeon-selected dimensions. Its systematic diameter underestimation and broad pair-level differences support its use as an initialization and review aid, with final sizing retained as a surgeon decision.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(15)
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE), Stadtarchiv Ibbenbüren (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
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.