ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2019
Improved implant position and lower revision rate with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04525950 (Robotized Computer Navigation Versus Conventional Technique in Total Knee Replacement. A Randomized, Clinical and Radiostereometric Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 104 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Robotized Computer Navigation Versus Conventional Technique in Total Knee Replacement. A Randomized, Clinical and Radiostereometric Trial.
Who cites it
104 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 171 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early clinical, radiological, and safety outcomes of NAVIO-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic-Assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty restores native joint line height and reduces alignment outliers.International orthopaedics · 2025Pooled it
- Correlation of revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical studies and worldwide arthroplasty registers.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty: an evolution in progress. A concise review of the available systems and the data supporting them.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2021Pooled it
- MAKO CT-based robotic arm-assisted system is a reliable procedure for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Pooled it
- High survivorship rate and good clinical outcomes at mid-term follow-up for lateral UKA: a systematic literature review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: does it improve the precision of the surgery and its clinical outcomes? Systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Robotic arm-assisted vs conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of the effects on clinical outcomes.Medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Patient-specific vs. Oxford microplasty instrumentation in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of medical research · 2025Trial
- A new seven-axis robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty system improves component positioning: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- No difference of gait parameters in patients with image-free robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared to a conventional technique: early results of a randomized controlled trial.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Trial
- Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Utilizing NAVIO, CORI Imageless Systems and Manual TKA Accurately Restore Femoral Rotational Alignment and Yield Satisfactory Clinical Outcomes: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Trial
- Computer-Assisted Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2020Trial
- Radiographic accuracy of implant positioning in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, does an imageless robotic system make a difference?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- [Robotic knee arthroplasty-an evidence-based, narrative assessment of the current state].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Reduced postoperative inflammation and blood loss after robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental compared with total knee arthroplasty: A propensity score-matched analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Precision and Accuracy of Polyethylene Thickness in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparison of Conventional Measured Resection and Robotic-Assisted Techniques.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Mako robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty mitigates the impact of surgeon handedness.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- A case series of robotic TKA in stiff knees using the imageless CORI system: technical strategies and early functional results.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Article
44 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this case-control study was to compare implant position and revision rate for UKA, performed with either a robotic-assisted system or with conventional technique.
methodsEighty UKA (57 medial, 23 lateral) were performed with robotic assistance (BlueBelt Navio system) between 2013 and 2017. These patients were matched with 80 patients undergoing UKA using the same prosthesis, implanted using conventional technique. The sagittal and coronal component position was assessed on postoperative radiographs. The revision rate was reported at last follow-up.
resultsThe mean follow-up was 19.7 months ± 9 for the robotic-assisted group, and 24.2 months ± 16 for the control group. The rate of postoperative limb alignment outliers (± 2°) was significantly higher in the control group than in the robotic-assisted group for both lateral UKA (26% in robotic group versus 61% in control group; p = 0.018) and medial UKA (16% versus 32%, resp.; p = 0.038). The coronal and sagittal tibial baseplate position had significantly less outliers (± 3°) in the robotic-assisted group, than in the control group. Revision rates were: 5% (n = 4/80) for robotic assisted UKA and 9% (n = 7/80) for conventional UKA (n.s.). The reasons for revision were different between groups, with 86% of revisions in the control group occurring in association with component malposition or limb malalignment, compared with none in the robotic-assisted group.
conclusionRobotic-assisted UKA has a lower rate of postoperative limb alignment outliers, as well as a lower revision rate, compared to conventional technique. The accuracy of implant positioning is improved by this robotic-assisted system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level of evidence III. Retrospective case-control study CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This is the first paper comparing implant position, clinical outcome, and revision rate for UKA performed using the Navio robotic system with a control 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.