ArticleInternational orthopaedics2026
Navigation-assisted transtrochanteric rotational osteotomy for osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
Article in International orthopaedics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent advances in navigation systems have enabled more precise osteotomies. However, the clinical outcomes of navigation-assisted transtrochanteric rotational osteotomy (TRO) for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of conventional TRO and navigation-assisted TRO for ONFH.
methodsFrom January 2013 to December 2023, 18 patients (18 hips) underwent conventional TRO (Conventional group), while 18 patients (18 hips) underwent navigation-assisted TRO (Navigation group). The mean follow-up period was 96.2 months in the Conventional group and 58.2 months in the Navigation group. Clinical and radiographic evaluations included the Harris Hip Score (HHS), complication rates, radiographic parameters, and survival rates. The endpoints were defined as conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) or radiographic failure.
resultsThere were no significant differences in preoperative or postoperative HHS between the Conventional and Navigation groups. Complication rates were also comparable between the groups. However, significant differences were observed in the postoperative femoral neck-shaft angle, change in femoral anteversion angle, and postoperative intact ratio between the groups. The five year survival rates, with conversion to THA and radiographic failure as endpoints, did not differ significantly between the groups.
conclusionNavigation-assisted TRO was effective in achieving a greater intact ratio and facilitating adjustment of femoral anteversion. However, the clinical outcomes of navigation-assisted TRO were comparable to those of conventional TRO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42287373What 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.