ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Use of a Robotic Platform Compared with Manual Preparation for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Cadaver-Based Feasibility Study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Aim and Background: Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is technically demanding, particularly when acetabular bone loss, distorted anatomy, and uncertain screw fixation complicate reconstruction. Robotic-assisted platforms may improve pre-operative planning and intraoperative execution, but its role in revision THA has not yet been fully established. This cadaver-based feasibility study evaluated the effectiveness of robotic-assisted technology in revision THA acetabular reconstruction. Materials and Methods: In one fresh-frozen specimen with prior bilateral manually performed total hip arthroplasties, full acetabular revision with standardized acetabular defects was performed. Computed tomography-based robotic-assisted revision THA was performed on one side and conventional manual revision THA on the contralateral side. Pre-operative planning, acetabular preparation, component positioning, screw number and length, quadrant distribution of screw fixation, pelvic perforation, and augment preparation were assessed. Results: Robotic-assisted revision THA achieved fixation in all four acetabular quadrants using screws ranging from 20 mm to 40 mm, without pelvic perforation. The final construct closely matched the pre-operative plan, with 1.2° absolute inclination error, and augment preparation and implantation required <5 min. Manual revision THA achieved fixation across three acetabular quadrants using six screws ranging from 15 to 40 mm; however, all demonstrated pelvic perforation. Manual preparation showed greater intraoperative variability, and augment preparation and implantation required approximately 15 min. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted revision THA demonstrated greater concordance with pre-operative planning, broader acetabular screw fixation, avoidance of pelvic perforation, and faster augment preparation compared with manual techniques. These findings suggest robotic-assisted technology may enhance precision and reproducibility in complex revision THA and warrant further clinical investigation.
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.