SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic assistance in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of leg length, cup orientation, and early outcomes.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
Abstract
This review examined whether robotic assistance alters postoperative leg-length discrepancy (LLD), acetabular cup orientation, or early hip-specific outcomes relative to conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). We searched PubMed and Web of Science through May 2026 for comparative English-language reports. Study eligibility, data extraction, and methodological appraisal were undertaken independently by two reviewers. Mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in Review Manager 5.4. Model selection was based on the target estimand and anticipated clinical and methodological diversity; leave-one-out and alternative-model sensitivity analyses were undertaken for heterogeneous outcomes. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD420261454043). The review included seven studies and 968 participants. Compared with conventional THA, robot-assisted THA yielded a smaller postoperative LLD (MD = -2.02, 95% CI -3.46 to -0.58; P = 0.006) and a higher Harris Hip Score (MD = 2.96, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.80; P = 0.002). Mean cup anteversion was lower in the robotic group (MD = -1.52, 95% CI -2.29 to -0.76; P < 0.0001), whereas cup inclination did not differ (MD = -0.71, 95% CI -3.26 to 1.83; P = 0.58). The robotic group also had higher Forgotten Joint Score (MD = 14.68, 95% CI 5.02 to 24.33; P = 0.003) and Oxford Hip Score values (MD = 2.61, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.51; P = 0.007). Robotic assistance was linked to a modest improvement in leg-length restoration and to higher scores on several early functional measures. The limited number of studies, predominance of nonrandomized designs, and marked heterogeneity in some analyses temper the certainty of these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42742817What 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.