ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews2026
Implementation of Robotic-Assisted Procedure for Total Hip Arthroplasty Is Not Economical in a High-Volume Orthopaedic Facility.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 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
backgroundAdvances in elective primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) have led to the use of robotic assistance and computer navigation during surgery; recent reports have demonstrated substantial benefits of this technology. However, few studies have made a head-to-head comparison of technology with a specific focus on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) when preoperative patient profiles are well controlled. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare outcomes among patients who underwent conventional, robotic-assisted, and computer-navigated procedures.
methodsThis retrospective study included patients aged 25 to 89 years who underwent THAs between January 2020 and May 2025. Patients were matched on age, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and preoperative Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and were assigned to study groups based on the technology used: (1) conventional, (2) robotic-assisted, and (3) computer-navigated. Postoperative recovery metrics between groups were compared up to 1 year from the surgery.
resultsA total of 3799 patients were included: 2582 (68%) in the conventional group, 389 (10%) in the robotic-assisted group, and 828 (22%) in the computer-navigated group. PROs improved with no differences between groups by 12 months but showed slightly slower recovery in computer-navigated cases. Complication rates (return to operating room and hospital readmittance) were similar in all groups. Both robotic-assisted surgery and computer-navigated procedures cost around $1000 more than the conventional procedure, with robotic-assisted procedures taking 3 minutes longer than conventional procedures (P < 0.05).
conclusionDespite added cost, the technology-assisted procedures did not offer substantial improvements to surgical outcomes when used in primary THAs in a high-volume orthopaedic hospital. When controlled by matching demographics, comorbidities, and PROs, the technology-supported THA patients had no clinically relevant differences in postoperative outcomes and had higher hospital utilization compared with the conventional group.
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.