ReviewJournal of orthopaedics2025
Augmented reality navigation systems vs. conventional techniques in acetabular cup positioning: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of augmented reality (AR) techniques in acetabular cup positioning during total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were systematically searched until December 12, 2024 according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines for prospective and retrospective studies comparing AR techniques to conventional ones regarding acetabular cup positioning. Anteversion, inclination angles, blood loss, operation time and postoperative complications comprised the outcomes. Bias assessment was performed with the RoB 2 tool for prospective studies and ROBINS-I for retrospective ones. Results: In total, 9 studies were included in the systematic review and 8 in the meta-analysis. The target error according to postoperative radiographs or computer scan for both anteversion and inclination angles was significantly more precise in the 346 THAs of the AR group (Z Conclusion: The different types of studies, as well as their individual way of assessing the acetabular cup angles are the main limitations of the meta-analysis. The results provide a strong sign of improved acetabular cup positioning with the help of AR systems, while maintaining a favorable safety profile. Prospero registration number: CRD42024609350.
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.