Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32913593›Full record

ArticleOrthopedic reviews2020

What are the benefits of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty over conventional manual total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review of comparative studies.

Fabio Mancino, Giorgio Cacciola, Michael-Alexander Malahias, Roberto De Filippis, Davide De Marco, Vincenzo Di Matteo, Gu A, Peter K Sculco, Giulio Maccauro, Ivan De Martino

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Continuous outcomes of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty trials are statistically fragile.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Complications and downsides of the robotic total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Learning curve in image-based robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty: a MAKO-robot experience.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Learning curve for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Fabio MancinoDivision of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Giorgio CacciolaGIOMI Istituto Ortopedico del Mezzogiorno d'Italia Franco Scalabrino, Ganzirri, Messina, Italy.
Michael-Alexander MalahiasStavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Roberto De FilippisII Orthopaedic Clinic, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Davide De MarcoDivision of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo Di MatteoDivision of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Gu AStavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Peter K SculcoStavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Giulio MaccauroDivision of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Ivan De MartinoDivision of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITHospital for Special Surgery · USIstituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale del Mezzogiorno · ITStavros · USUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a highly successful operation that improves patients' quality of life and functionality. Yet, up to 20% of TKA patients remain unsatisfied with the functional outcomes. Robotic TKA has gained increased attention and popularity in order to improve patient satisfaction and implant survivorship by increasing accuracy and precision of component implantation. The current systematic review was run in order to compare implant survivorship, complication rates, clinical outcomes, and radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted TKA (RA) and conventional manual TKA (CM). Articles were referenced from the US National Library of Medicine (PubMed/MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Nine comparative studies with 1199 operated knees in 1159 patients were included, 614 underwent active or semiactive robotic-assisted TKA compared to 585 CM-TKA. Improvements in the RA group were reported for early functional outcomes, radiographic outliers (RA 16% vs CM 76%) and radiolucent lines (RA 0% vs CM 35%). No significant differences between the two groups were reported in overall survivorship (RA 98.3% vs CM 97.3%), complication rate (RA 2.4% vs CM 1.4%) and operative time (RA 88 min vs CM 79 min). Despite higher costs, roboticassisted TKA offers better short-term clinical outcomes when compared to conventional manual technique with reduction in radiographic outliers and reduced risks of iatrogenic soft tissues injuries (reduced blood loss and postoperative drainage). Further high-quality long-term studies of modern robotic systems are required in order to evaluate how the increased accuracy and reduced outliers affect the long-term survivorship of the implants and the clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Clinical outcomesRobotic knee surgeryRobotic surgerySurvivorshipTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID32913593
PMCPMC7459388
OpenAlexW3040663145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.