ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Augmented reality navigation improves intraoperative resection accuracy but may not prevent alignment deviations in total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of experimental 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.
- Augmented reality navigation improves intraoperative resection accuracy but may not prevent alignment deviations in total knee arthroplasty.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose was to compare intraoperative versus postoperative coronal, sagittal and axial alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed using augmented reality (AR) navigation, and determine whether imperfect implant positioning affects postoperative alignment. Methods: A retrospective assessment was conducted on a study cohort of 70 patients (70 knees), who received unrestricted kinematic aligned TKA using AR navigation between February 2022 and April 2023. Implant positioning was assessed on postoperative frontal (divergence between the proximal tibial resection and baseplate) and sagittal radiographs (gaps between the distal femoral resection and implant) to distinguish between knees with adequate and imperfect implant positioning. The deviation between intraoperative and postoperative alignment measurements (lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), hip knee ankle angle (HKA), posterior tibial slope (PTS) and femoral rotation) was assessed, and the number of outliers calculated using thresholds of 1° and 3°. Results: There were considerable proportions of knees with deviations between intraoperative and postoperative LDFA (>1°, 43 [61%]; >3°,14 [20%]), MPTA (>1°, 42 [60%]; >3°, 5 [7%]), HKA angle (>1°, 42 [60%]; >3°, 17 [24%]), and PTS (>1°, 47 [67%]; >3°, 15 [21%]). It is worth noting, however, that most of the relevant deviations were observed in knees that had imperfectly positioned implants (19 of 70, 27%), where the femoral component was inadequately impacted during surgery (15 of 19, 79%) and/or the tibial baseplate had an uneven cement distribution (8 of 19, 42%). Conclusion: The use of AR facilitates precise bone resections during TKA, yet it may not reduce deviations between intraoperative and postoperative LDFA, MPTA, HKA angle or PTS. As with any assistive technology, accurate bone resections alone are not sufficient to grant adequate implant positioning during TKA, which requires meticulous attention from surgeons to ensure sufficient component impaction and uniform cement distributions. Level of Evidence: IV.
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.