ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
A Prospective Clinical Study to Evaluate Safety and Performance of an Intra-Surgical Hydraulic Distractor During Spinal Surgeries.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03501810 (Prospective, Single-Arm, Post-Market Clinical Follow-up), which is not on this 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.
Prospective, Single-Arm, Post-Market Clinical Follow-up (PMCF) Study to Further Assess the Safety and Performance of the OrtoWell® Distractor in Patients Undergoing Spinal Surgery
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Spinal surgeries often require the manipulation of bone structures while at the same time protecting sensitive tissues. Existing surgical systems involve manual force, which has a high risk of damaging the vertebrae and instruments interfere with the visibility between the vertebrae, which complicates work. The OrtoWell Materials and Methods: This study is a prospective, single-arm, multi-center observational study and was conducted between April 2018 and April 2023 at 3 German sites in patients undergoing anterior or lateral spinal surgery requiring vertebral separation. The device's safety and usability were assessed through surgeon-completed questionnaires on the device and its subcomponents, clinical outcomes and cardiovascular assessments. Assessments were conducted at four time points, at baseline, time of the index procedure, discharge and at a 30-day follow-up. Results: 31 patients (13 males, mean age 62.33) were included. Single and multi-level treatments were performed using different accesses. The device facilitated spinal surgeries without any complications or device-related adverse events. Usability, stability and force control were evaluated as uniformly positive and all procedures proceeded as planned. Mean applied pressure was 147.69±29.48 bar. There were no major delays in surgical time and a mean blood loss of 215.17±113.57 cc. Cardiovascular parameters remained stable, with no significant changes between baseline and follow-up. Hospital stays averaged 16.39±10.25 days. Surgeons unanimously reported that the distractor simplified surgery. Discussion and Conclusions: The investigated device demonstrated high safety and performance, enabling precise force control and simplifying spinal surgeries. These findings suggest that hydraulic distractors could enhance surgical outcomes by improving intraoperative control and reducing procedural challenges. Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03501810, 12 Mar 2018).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.