ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025
Direct lateral vs. posterior-lateral approach in robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty: clinical and radiographic comparison.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: does improved precision translate into better clinical outcomes? A systematic review.International orthopaedics · 2026Review
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
introductionThe main goal of this study was to compare patient outcomes following robotic-arm assisted THA (RTHA) using the direct lateral approach (DLA) and the posterior-lateral approach (PLA) by analysing the clinical and radiographical data. MATERIALS AND
methods203 consecutive patients diagnosed with end stage hip osteoarthritis underwent RTHA at the same orthopaedic centre between 2015 and 2019. Patients were divided in two groups based on the surgical approach where 95 patients received PLA and 108 received DLA. All patients were assessed pre-operatively and at minimum 3-year follow-up using Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). A radiographic evaluation was performed for every patient to assess the incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO).
resultsPatients in the PLA cohort had higher scores in the post-operative WOMAC when compared to the DLA group (PLA: 96.2 ± 8.2 vs. DLA: 93.6 ± 10.3, p = 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the post-op HHS (PLA 86.3 ± 7 vs. DLA: 86.3 ± 9.5, p = 0.97). Accurate component positioning was achieved according to the pre-operative planning in both groups. There were no cases of dislocation. We found a significantly higher incidence of HO in the DLA group (59.3%) compared to the PLA group (12.6%). However, this difference was not associated with a poorer clinical outcome.
conclusionsCurrent controversy still persists regarding the surgical approach without clear evidence about which one is more appropriate. Nowadays, it seems that surgeons' skill and experience to perform an approach are still more relevant than the choice of the approach. Both PLA and DLA represent valid surgical options for performing RTHA, yielding excellent clinical outcomes without clear evidence of superiority of one approach over the other.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40372472What 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.