ArticleInternational orthopaedics2026
A preliminary validation study showing comparable accuracy between Computed Tomography based and imageless portable navigation systems when both systems are used.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAccurate acetabular cup placement is essential in total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that the newly introduced Computed Tomography (CT)-based portable navigation system would demonstrate accuracy comparable to that of the imageless portable navigation system. The aim of this study was to compare cup placement accuracy between the CT-based and imageless portable navigation systems of the same platform in THA performed in the lateral decubitus position.
methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study included 36 patients who underwent primary THA via a direct lateral approach in the lateral decubitus position. In all cases, both imageless and CT-based portable navigation systems were used concurrently. Postoperative cup alignment was evaluated using three-dimensional CT (3D-CT). The primary outcome was the absolute error in cup inclination and anteversion, defined as the difference between intraoperative navigation values and postoperative 3D-CT measurements in the functional. Secondary outcomes included outlier rates and registration success rates.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between the imageless and CT-based portable navigation systems in the mean absolute error for inclination (2.2 ± 1.8° vs. 2.3 ± 1.8°, p = 0.93) or anteversion (2.3 ± 2.3° vs. 2.6 ± 2.5°, p = 0.41). There were no significant differences in outlier proportions. The registration success rate was 92% (36/39) due to three technical failures.
conclusionIn this preliminary study, the CT-based portable navigation system demonstrated cup placement accuracy comparable to that of the imageless portable navigation system. Although the CT-based system may provide additional spatial information intraoperatively, its impact on clinical outcomes remains unclear and requires further longitudinal investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42332259What 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.