SynthesisMedicine2019
Clinical efficacy of orthopilot navigation system versus conventional manual of total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- CT-based navigation for total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2023Pooled it
- Imageless navigation for primary total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis study.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of the accuracy for cup positioning between portable inertial navigation systems and manual methods during total hip arthroplasty in the anterolateral supine position.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Utilizing Three-Dimensional Head-Lesser Trochanter Distance Could Further Reduce Leg Length Inequality in Primary Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Spinopelvic Relationship and Its Impact on Total Hip Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the clinical efficacy between Orthopilot navigation system and conventional manual surgery in total hip arthroplasty (THA).
methodsElectronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating Orthopilot navigation system versus conventional manual in patients undergoing THA. Outcome measurements include anteversion angle, inclination angle, preoperative leg length discrepancy, postoperative leg length discrepancy and femoral offset. Statistical software Stata 12.0 was used for data-analysis.
resultsA total of 5 studies were finally included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that the conventional manual group have a less anteversion angle than that in Orthopilot navigation system group (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 4.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.53, 5.82, P = .000). And pooled analysis showed that the inclination angle in Orthopilot navigation group was less than that in conventional manual group (WMD = -4.19, 95% CI = -8.00, -0.37, P = .031). There was no significant difference between the preoperative leg length discrepancy and postoperative leg length discrepancy (P > .05). Orthopilot navigation system compared with conventional manual procedure was associated with decreased of femoral offset by 2.76 (WMD = -2.76, 95%CI = -3.90, -1.62, P = .000).
conclusionBoth Orthopilot navigation system and conventional THA result in significant improvements in patient function with similar overall complication rates and have their own edges in cup position.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.