ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Mixed reality guidance in osteotomy provides superior precision and accuracy: validation and comparative study.
Article in International orthopaedics, 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.
- Corrective derotation osteotomy of the proximal phalanx using intraoperative Mixed Reality guidance.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
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
purposeBone deformities, such as cubitus varus, can lead to abnormal joint alignment and impaired function. Corrective osteotomy aims to restore anatomical alignment, and its precision may be enhanced using various guidance methods. Emerging mixed reality systems allow for the placement and manipulation of virtual objects and may offer effective surgical navigation. This study aimed to validate the accuracy and precision of holographic guidance compared with classic visual estimation and a printed triangle gauge in a controlled laboratory setting.
methodsClosed-wedge osteotomies at angles of 15° and 30° were performed on fresh-frozen porcine femora. Three techniques were evaluated: Group EB (eyeballing)-visual estimation; Group PW (printed wedge)-using 15° and 30° plastic templates; and Group HW (holographic wedge)-using a mixed reality system (RSQ HOLO, RSQ Technologies, Poznań, Poland, and HoloLens 2, Microsoft). In the HW group, a holographic wedge tool guided the osteotomy. The angle of the excised bone wedge and post-osteotomy alignment in the anteroposterior (AP) and lateral planes were measured physically (goniometer) and digitally (radiographs). Statistical analysis assessed accuracy (closeness to 15°/30°) and precision (standard deviation [SD], mean deviation, coefficient of variation [CV]).
resultsAt 15°, the PW and HW techniques demonstrated greater accuracy and lower error compared with EB (T = 3.60; p < 0.01), with HW yielding the lowest systematic error (SE = 0.12). Alignment in the AP plane was similar across groups (T < 2.11; p > 0.05), whereas lateral alignment showed significant differences (T > 2.11; p < 0.05). At 30°, HW achieved the best alignment in both AP (T = 2.48; p = 0.01) and lateral views (T = 2.35; p = 0.02). Lateral alignment was improved by more than 5° with holographic guidance compared to other techniques (p = 0.01). The HW group exhibited the highest precision for both 15° and 30° angles (lowest SD and CV; p < 0.05).
conclusionsAugmented reality provides accurate and precise intraoperative guidance, outperforming both visual estimation and printed wedge templates in deformity correction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40498109What 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.