ArticlePatient safety in surgery2026
The safety of radiofrequency surgical sponges in orthopedic surgery: a validation study in 2,251 arthroplasty procedures.
Article in Patient safety in surgery, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetained foreign objects (RFOs), particularly surgical sponges, remain a serious yet preventable source of morbidity and litigation. Although radiofrequency (RF)-tagged sponges have shown 100% sensitivity and specificity in general surgery, their performance in orthopedic procedures involving metallic implants remains underexplored. This study evaluates the reliability of RF-tagged sponges in total joint arthroplasty and identifies unique limitations associated with their use in orthopedic surgery.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted of 2,251 total knee and total hip arthroplasty cases performed at a high-volume orthopedic center from April 30, 2024 to February 28, 2025. All cases employed both standard manual sponge counts and RF detection technology. The primary outcome was the discrepancy rate between manual and RF counts, with secondary analysis of false-positive and false-negative events and contributing intraoperative factors.
resultsThree discrepancies (0.13%) were identified. One case represented a false-negative RF scan in which the tag became undetectable due to cement polymerization and proximity to a metallic femoral stem. Two cases involved false-positive detections that resolved on repeat scanning without evidence of retained items.
conclusionsRF-tagged surgical sponges may serve as a useful adjunct for RFO prevention in orthopedic surgery but may be affected by metallic interference and tag damage during implant cementation. The technology should supplement, not replace, manual counts and intraoperative imaging. Further research is warranted to optimize RF performance in orthopedic applications.
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.