ArticleInternational orthopaedics2026
Robotic-assisted versus conventional total hip arthroplasty: a three-year comparative analysis of patient-reported outcomes and complications.
Article in International orthopaedics, 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.
- Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: does improved precision translate into better clinical outcomes? A systematic review.International orthopaedics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRobotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) has been shown to improve implant positioning accuracy; however, whether these advantages translate into superior patient-reported outcomes remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcomes and complication rates between robotic-assisted and manual total hip arthroplasty (M-THA) at a minimum of three years follow-up.
methodsThis retrospective observational cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing primary THA between June 2020 and June 2022 at a single high-volume arthroplasty centre. Seventy-five patients underwent M-THA and 81 underwent RA-THA. The primary outcome was the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) at three years. Secondary outcomes included modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS-Jr), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and complications including dislocation, infection, readmission, and reoperation.
resultsA total of 156 patients were available for final analysis. The robotic cohort demonstrated significantly higher OHS (46.47 ± 2.98 vs. 45.01 ± 4.90; p = 0.016) and HOOS-Jr scores (94.82 ± 9.70 vs. 91.48 ± 10.51; p = 0.005). However, the observed differences did not exceed the reported minimal clinically important differences. No significant differences were observed in mHHS (p = 0.497) or FJS (p = 0.949). Complications occurred in 2.5% of RA-THA patients and 6.7% of M-THA patients (p = 0.262).
conclusionBoth robotic-assisted and manual THA provided excellent medium-term outcomes. Robotic-assisted THA demonstrated modest functional advantages and a trend toward lower complication rates, although these differences were not clinically meaningful. Larger prospective studies are required to determine whether improved accuracy translates into superior long-term outcomes and implant survivorship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42521886What 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.