ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparison of accuracy between Navbit Sprint and AR-CT-based navigation in total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Accuracy of acetabular cup installation angles using two augmented reality navigation systems: computed tomography-based and noninvasive portable systems in total hip arthroplasty.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A portable navigation system that constructs a three-dimensional coordinate system by laterally tilting the operating table without anterior superior iliac spine registration has been introduced for total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study compared the accuracy of intraoperative navigation values in THA between a novel portable navigation system and an augmented reality (AR)-computed tomography (CT)-based navigation system. Thirty-four primary cementless THAs were retrospectively analyzed. All procedures were performed using an anterolateral approach in the supine position. Using AR-CT-based navigation, coronal pelvic tilt was adjusted to 0°, and sagittal and axial tilts were recorded. Table tilting was then performed to complete portable navigation registration. Acetabular cups were implanted using AR-CT-based navigation, and intraoperative measurements were obtained using the portable system. Postoperative CT measured radiographic inclination (RI) and anteversion (RA). Navigation error was defined as the absolute difference between intraoperative measurements and postoperative CT values. The association between portable navigation error and pelvic tilt at registration was also examined. Mean postoperative RI and RA were 39.3° ± 3.1° and 15.4° ± 3.1°, respectively, with all components within the Lewinnek safe zone. Mean navigation errors for AR-CT-based navigation were 1.9° ± 1.2° (inclination) and 1.9° ± 1.4° (anteversion). Portable navigation showed higher errors: 2.6° ± 2.7° (inclination) and 4.3° ± 2.9° (anteversion). Anteversion error was significantly greater with portable navigation and positively correlated with axial pelvic tilt at registration. Portable navigation showed lower anteversion accuracy than AR-CT-based navigation. Axial pelvic tilt at registration may affect anteversion accuracy with portable navigation.
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.