ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Application of TINAVI orthopedic robot-assisted proximal interlocking screw placement for femoral retrograde intramedullary nails: a retrospective clinical study.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Retrograde intramedullary nailing is a common treatment for middle and lower femoral fractures where proximal locking is the main challenge. This study explored the application and experience of robot-assisted retrograde intramedullary nail proximal precision locking. Data from 74 patients with middle and lower femoral fractures treated with retrograde intramedullary nails between January 2021 and June 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different proximal locking methods, the data were divided into a robotic group (34 cases) and a free-hand group (40 cases). General, perioperative, and follow-up data of the two groups were collected, and their differences were compared based on specified parameters. The results are as follows: the mean follow-up time was (16.10 ± 2.38) months, the number of screw placements in the robotic group (1.03 ± 0.17) was less than that in the manual group (1.63 ± 1.15, P = 0.004), and the number of fluoroscopies (1.06 ± 0.34) was significantly less than that in the manual group (6.35 ± 2.46, P < 0.001). Additionally, the total length of the proximal incision (2.16 ± 0.24) was shorter than that in the manual group (3.58 ± 0.38, P < 0.001), and the success rate of one-time screw placement (97.1%, 33/34) was significantly higher than that in the manual group (67.5%, 27/40; P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in the other indices of the two groups (P > 0.05). For the treatment of the middle and lower femoral fractures using a femoral retrograde intramedullary nail, the robotic navigation system is more efficient than traditional manual nail placement under fluoroscopy because it can shorten the number of proximal locking nail placements, the number of fluoroscopies, and the total length of the proximal incision. Additionally, it can reduce the exposure to external radiation and increase the success rate of one-time nail placement. Thus, this study presents a novel approach for the placement of proximal interlocking screws in femoral retrograde intramedullary nails, making it worthy of clinical application.
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.