Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Freehand Fluoroscopy-Guided Percutaneous Screw Fixation in Femoral Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robotic-assisted navigation for percutaneous femoral neck fracture fixation is a new technology that has shown enhanced intraoperative and postoperative outcomes compared to the conventional freehand fluoroscopy-guided technique. The authors aim to compare robot-assisted femoral neck fracture fixation to conventional freehand fluoroscopy-guided repair. Electronic databases were searched, identifying all observational studies comparing outcomes of both groups. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. The primary outcomes included operative duration (minutes), intraoperative bleeding (mL), fluoroscopy exposure, and frequency of intraoperative drilling. The secondary outcomes included Harris scores, healing rate and time, screw accuracy, and postoperative complications. Seven observational studies were identified, enrolling 506 patients. There was a significant difference between the robot-assisted and conventional groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss (mean difference (MD) = -18.83, p ≤ 0.05), fluoroscopy exposure (MD = -1.81, p ≤ 0.05), and intraoperative drilling frequency (MD = -7.35, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in operative duration between the groups (MD = -0.21, p = 0.66). Most secondary outcomes were improved in the robot-assisted group. Overall, robot-assisted fixation was superior in terms of safety and efficacy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".