ArticleArthroplasty today2024
Use of an Automated Surgical Impactor Reduces Femoral Broaching Time in Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty: Results From a Randomized, Multicenter Study.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. 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.
- Automated impaction in uncemented total hip arthroplasty : a systematic review and meta-analysis.Bone & joint open · 2026Pooled it
- Early Performance of a Collared, Triple-Tapered Cementless Femoral Stem in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Low risk of periprosthetic fracture and subsidence with automated impaction device in arthroplasty following femoral neck fracture: A retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Impaction in total hip arthroplasty has typically been conducted using a mallet. A surgical automated impactor has been developed with the goal of reducing surgeon variability, fatigue, and injury. There is also potential to reduce the variability of each impaction step in which automated impaction is used, through reproducible and consistent application of force. Methods: Patients were randomized into either the mallet control group, or the automated impaction study group (1:1 randomization). The primary endpoint analysis was conducted to demonstrate that femoral broaching time (in minutes) with an automated impactor is noninferior to femoral broaching time with manual instruments (mallet) under a noninferiority (NI) margin of 1.25 minutes, with a subsequent test of superiority. A total of 218 patients were randomized and treated (109 in each group). Results: Mean femoral broaching time was 5.8 minutes in the automated impaction study group (automated), and 8.1 minutes in the mallet control group (mallet), a 28.4% reduction ( Conclusions: In this randomized multicenter study, an automated impactor was shown to reduce femoral broaching time in primary total hip arthroplasty, with no increase in fractures, but no decrease in operating room time was noted.
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.