ArticleInternational orthopaedics2019
Conventional versus computer-assisted surgery in total knee arthroplasty: comparison at ten years follow-up.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical outcomes associated with robotic and computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: a machine learning-augmented systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of iASSIST Navigation System with Conventional Techniques in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes.Orthopaedic surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Similar outcomes in computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty: ten-year results of a prospective randomized study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Trial
- Comparison of custom cutting guides based on three-dimensional computerized CT-scan planning and a conventional ancillary system based on two-dimensional planning in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.International orthopaedics · 2019Trial
- Validation of imageless navigation in total knee arthroplasty using a postoperative radiographic approach.Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025Article
- Comparison of the accuracy and efficacy of different assistive techniques in primary total knee arthroplasty: A network meta-analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Navigated, gap-balanced, adjusted mechanical alignment achieves alignment and balancing goals in a very high percentage but with partially non-anatomical resections.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
- No Difference in Clinical Outcomes and Survivorship for Robotic, Navigational, and Conventional Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty with a Minimum Follow-up of 10 Years.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2023Article
- Complications of computer-assisted navigation in total knee replacement: retrospective cohort of eight hundred and seventy eight consecutive knees.International orthopaedics · 2020Article
- Computer and robotic - assisted total knee arthroplasty: a review of outcomes.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2020Review
- The patient results and satisfaction of knee arthroplasty in a validated grading system.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
- Surgeons and robots.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
- General and specialized Orthopaedics.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
- Total knee arthroplasty in Italy: reflections from the last fifteen years and projections for the next thirty.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeComputer-assisted systems (CAS) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were expected to result in more accurate prosthesis implantation, better patient outcomes, and longer implant survival when compared to conventional instrumentation (CI). The aim of this study was to compare two groups of patients operated using CAS or CI at ten years follow-up.
methodsOne hundred twenty TKA patients, 60 using CAS and 60 using CI, were contacted after a decade for follow-up. Eligible patients received radiological examination to assess the lower-limb mechanical axis. They were also clinically assessed using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Knee Society Score for Knee (KSS-K) and Function (KSS-F) Scoring. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to assess revisions, not for post-traumatic reasons.
resultsIn CAS and CI groups, the lower-limb mechanical axis was 1.7° ± 2.4° and 1.5° ± 2.8°, respectively; corresponding KOOS values were 82.3 ± 14.3 and 78.6 ± 14.4; KSS-K values were 85.9 ± 11.1 and 85.0 ± 9.7; KSS-F values were 82.2 ± 19.3 and 83.8 ± 18. For these assessments, the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Two CAS (3.8%) and three CI patients (5.7%) were revised. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups.
conclusionsNo significant differences were found at long-term follow-up in terms of radiographical-clinical outcomes and of implant survival between TKA operated using CAS or CI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30196443What 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.