Letter to the Editor
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Orthop. Jun 18, 2025; 16(6): 107215
Published online Jun 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i6.107215
Table 1 The comparison between commonly used techniques in joint replacement

Augmented reality
Surgical robot
Traditional navigation
AccuracyHigh precision, real-time visualization, close to robotic levelsExtremely high precision, relies on robotic arm and algorithmsModerate precision, heavily dependent on surgeon experience
Cost-effectivenessLower cost, affordable equipment, faster recoveryHigh cost, expensive maintenance, suitable for high-budget centersModerate cost, longer surgery and recovery times
Learning curveSteep but easier than robotic systemsVery steep, requires mastering complex operationsLow difficulty, mature and easy to learn
Clinical adoptionGradually increasing, limited by device performance and acceptanceLow adoption, mainly in large hospitals and complex casesWidely adopted, but limited in precision and efficiency
Surgery timeShorter, with real-time guidance improving efficiencyLonger, due to robotic setup and calibrationModerate, requiring intraoperative adjustments
Postoperative recoveryFaster recovery, less trauma, higher satisfactionFaster recovery, but higher financial burdenSlower recovery, more trauma
Technical limitationsLimited battery life, potential neck fatigue, lack of long-term dataHigh cost, complex maintenance, limited flexibilityDepends on preoperative imaging, limited real-time adjustment
Future potentialHigh, with artificial intelligence, 5G, and augmented reality integration, broad applicationsSignificant for complex surgeries, but limited by costLimited, likely to be replaced by augmented reality and robotics
Table 2 Summary of key studies on augmented reality-assisted total knee arthroplasty
Ref.
Study design
Sample size
AR system
Key focus
Main findings
Tsukada et al[7], 2019Single-center pilot study10AR-KNEETibial resection accuracyAR provided reliable accuracy in coronal, sagittal, and rotational alignment
Tsukada et al[8], 2021Prospective controlled trial74AR-KNEEDistal femoral osteotomy accuracyAR enabled more accurate osteotomy compared to conventional intramedullary guides
Bennett et al[9], 2023Prospective study20AR-ANCoronal component alignmentLow rate of component malposition in the coronal plane
Su et al[19], 2023A systematic review and meta-analysis-AR-based rehabilitation vs conventionalPain, function and anxietyAR-based rehabilitation improved early pain, function, and anxiety
Shim et al[6], 2023Randomized controlled trial56AR-based rehabilitation vs conventionalFunctionAR-based rehabilitation may be useful treatment as an alternative to conventional rehabilitation