ReviewDer Orthopade2021
[The superiority of navigation and robotics in hip arthroplasty: fact or myth?]
Review in Der Orthopade, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Does intraoperative fluoroscopy improve acetabular component positioning and limb-length discrepancy during direct anterior total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Augmented Intelligence in Joint Replacement Surgery: How can artificial intelligence (AI) bridge the gap between the man and the machine?Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2022Article
- Current concepts in hip-spine relationships: making them practical for total hip arthroplasty.EFORT open reviews · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer-assisted surgery represents a relatively novel treatment option in total hip arthroplasty, which has been supported by the technological progress over the latest decades. Navigation and robotics enable increasing the precision of cup positioning, as well as successful biomechanical restoration of leg length and offset. However, the intended target area is still one of debate in literature. Besides the learning curve, the use of navigation and robotics requires additional time and financial expense, which has not yet been addressed in the German healthcare system. This is one reason why computer-assisted surgery has not fully attained everyday routine. The number of comparative studies is limited, but the results are promising. However, if these surrogate measures will end in reduced revision rates or better outcome is unclear. Further prospective studies and register analysis might illuminate the potential benefit of navigation and robotics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33666672What 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.