ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2026
Efficacy Comparison of Open Reduction and Robot-Aided Infra-Acetabular and Posterior Column Screws Fixation in Complex Acetabular Fractures Surgery: Union Plate Versus Reconstruction Plate.
Article in Orthopaedic 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAn anatomical supra-pectineal quadrilateral surface buttress plate (Union Plate) has been designed and shown promising mechanical strength in vivo. Robot-aided technique has shown promising results in navigation of infra-acetabular and posterior column screws placement. This study sought to further examine whether the emerging anatomical plate provided advantages over the reconstruction plate in robot-aided complex acetabular fracture surgery.
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis comparing two internal fixation methods was conducted between September 2023 and January 2025. Specifically, 23 patients with complex acetabular fractures received robot-aided Union Plate fixation (Union Plate group), while another 20 patients underwent robot-aided reconstruction plate fixation (Reconstruction plate group). Intra-operative plate contouring time, robot-aided manipulation time, the number of channel adjustments per periarticular long screws, total operation time, blood loss, periarticular long screw placement quality, fracture reduction quality, hip joint function, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.
resultsWith identical robotic assistance, the Union Plate group experienced significantly shorter times for robot-aided manipulation (-12 min), intraoperative plate contouring (-9 min), and total operation (-23 min), along with reduced blood loss (-128 mL) and fewer channel adjustments of the periarticular long screws, compared to the reconstruction plate group. Both groups achieved satisfactory periarticular long screws placement, with a 95.7% perfect rate in the Union Plate group and 90.4% in the reconstruction plate group, showing no significant difference. Neither group experienced iatrogenic neurovascular injuries or screw penetration. There were also no significant differences in postoperative complications, fracture reduction quality, or hip joint function between the groups.
conclusionIn surgery for complex acetabular fractures, the Union Plate showed superior operability and safety compared to traditional reconstruction plates. It required less time for robot manipulation, intraoperative plate contouring, and total operation, while also resulting in reduced blood loss and fewer adjustments of the periarticular long screws.
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.