Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42471531›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026

Robotic-arm assistance in revision total hip arthroplasty improves the accuracy of acetabular component positioning: a cadaver-based study.

Kailey Fitzgerald, Ilya Borukhov, Varun Chandra, Chase Smitterberg, Michael A Mont, Sally LiArno

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kailey FitzgeraldStryker (United States), Mahwah, USA.
Ilya BorukhovStryker (United States), Mahwah, USA.
Varun ChandraStryker (United States), Mahwah, USA.
Chase SmitterbergDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, USA.
Michael A MontDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, USA. rhondamont@aol.com.
Sally LiArnoStryker (United States), Mahwah, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAcetabular component positioning is a key factor for stability, impingement, wear, and biomechanics in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, anatomic distortion and previous implants may complicate positioning. Although evidence on computed-tomography (CT)-based robotic assistance in revision THA is limited, its planning features and precision may improve surgical plan execution. This study aimed to measure the precision and accuracy of acetabular component positioning of revision robotic-arm assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) compared with a published manual primary total hip arthroplasty (M-THA) benchmark for: (a) acetabular inclination; (b) acetabular version; and (c) center of rotation (COR), with comparison by surgeon case volume. MATERIALS AND

methodsThere were seven cadavers (nine hips) that previously underwent primary THA revised with RA-THA by independent surgeons with varying primary RA-THA case volumes, surgical approaches, and acetabular component types. Due to surgical protocol deviations, two hips were excluded leaving seven hips from six cadavers. Pre- and postoperative CT scans were compared to calculate absolute error for inclination, version, and COR; normality was established with the Anderson-Darling test and two-variance tests assessed differences in standard deviations (α = 0.05). Mean differences between cadaver-based revision RA-THA and published M-THA values were compared with Welch's t-test for superiority (α = 0.05). Effect sizes were reported as mean differences with 95% upper bounds and sensitivity analyses were performed given the fixed sample size.

resultsRevision RA-THA demonstrated significantly greater accuracy for acetabular inclination (2.5 ± 1.9° versus 7.2 ± 3.2°, P = 0.008) and version (2.2 ± 1.6° versus 7.8 ± 4.6°, P = 0.014), and significantly greater precision for acetabular version (P = 0.023) compared with M-THA. There was adirectionally lower error for COR compared with M-THA. Mean error reductions were 5.7° for version and 4.7º for inclination with 95% upper bounds of -1.9 for both version and inclination. Low RA-THA surgical volume corresponded with the highest absolute error for shell inclination (5.5º) and version (5.0º), though values remained below published M-THA averages.

conclusionsRevision RA-THA reduced error in both acetabular inclination and acetabular version, and variability in acetabular version relative to the M-THA benchmark. Although these results relate only to technical performance, accurate acetabular positioning in clinical practice is an important factor in reducing the risk of malposition-related complications in revision THA.

Indexed as

AcetabulumArthroplasty, Replacement, HipRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCadaverFemaleHip ProsthesisHumansMaleReoperationTomography, X-Ray ComputedAcetabulumCadaverPositioningRevisionTotal hip arthroplastyVersion

Identifiers

PMID42471531
PMCPMC13380544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.