ReviewEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2025
Robot-assisted versus conventional percutaneous screw fixation in calcaneal fractures: a retrospective analysis.
Review in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2025. 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.
- Clinical application of robot-assisted fixation for calcaneal fractures: a meta-analysis with subgroup comparisons.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- [Study on Holosight robot-assisted fixation versus fixation via sinus tarsi approach in treatment of calcaneal fractures].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- TiRobot-assisted cannulated screw fixation for calcaneal fractures: a meta-analysis of surgical trauma, anatomical restoration, and functional recovery.Frontiers in surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of robotic guidance on screw placement accuracy and clinical outcomes in patients with calcaneal fractures. The primary research question was whether robot-assisted fixation provides superior surgical precision and recovery compared to conventional percutaneous techniques.
methodsA retrospective review of 98 patients treated between April 2022 and March 2024 was conducted. Patients were assigned to either a robot-assisted group (RA, n = 54) or a conventional percutaneous fixation group (CPF, n = 44). Parameters compared included operative time, blood loss, fluoroscopy use, intraoperative technical accuracy, hospital stay, fracture healing time, weight-bearing timeline, radiographic measurements, complication rates, VAS pain scores, and AOFAS scores. Follow-ups were performed at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.
resultsBoth groups showed significant postoperative improvements in calcaneal morphology. At 3 months, the RA group had significantly better restoration of length, width, height, Böhler's and Gissane's angles and step-off (all p < 0.05). The RA group had shorter operative time, reduced blood loss, fewer fluoroscopy exposures, fewer guidewire adjustments, faster fracture healing, and shorter hospital stay (all p < 0.001, except hospital stay p = 0.034). Surgical precision was enhanced with a higher first-attempt guide pin success rate (94.4% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.004) and no intra-articular misplacements (vs. 11.4%, p = 0.028). VAS pain scores and complication rates were significantly lower in the RA group. AOFAS scores were higher at 3 months (p = 0.045).
conclusionRobot-assisted percutaneous fixation improves screw placement accuracy, reduces early postoperative pain and complications, and promotes faster early recovery in calcaneal fractures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40844554What 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.