ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Comparative analysis of HURWA versus MAKO robotic-assisted TKA: a prospective cohort study of surgical accuracy and clinical outcomes.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has emerged as an advanced surgical technique. However, direct comparisons between Chinese and American robotic systems are limited.
objectiveExploratory comparison of surgical accuracy and short-term clinical outcomes between Chinese HURWA and American MAKO robotic systems in total knee arthroplasty.
methodsA prospective exploratory cohort study was conducted from September 2023 to January 2024. Eighty-five patients were assigned to undergo RA-TKA with either the HURWA system (n = 43) or the MAKO system (n = 42) based on the sequential clinical introduction of the systems. The primary outcomes were radiographic accuracy, including the restoration of the mechanical axis within ± 3°. Secondary outcomes encompassed surgical efficiency metrics and patient-reported clinical scores (WOMAC, HSS, VAS) assessed preoperatively and at one-year postoperatively.
resultsAll included patients have completed surgery and follow-up.The two systems achieved a comparable and high proportion of mechanical axis restoration within ± 3° (HURWA: 86.05% vs. MAKO: 90.48%). The HURWA system demonstrated a significant advantage in osteotomy time (6.03 ± 2.35 vs. 8.06 ± 2.73 min, P < 0.001). Both groups exhibited substantial and comparable improvements in all clinical outcome scores at the one-year follow-up. The HURWA system, as an open-platform design, offered flexibility in prosthesis selection, while the MAKO system demonstrated a highly standardized workflow.
conclusionThis exploratory comparison indicates that the HURWA system achieves favorable and comparable one-year clinical outcomes and radiographic alignment to the MAKO system in TKA, with distinct advantages in osteotomy efficiency and implant flexibility. These preliminary findings support the clinical potential of HURWA as a viable option, though definitive conclusions regarding its equivalence require validation through larger, long-term studies.
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.