ArticleJournal of orthopaedics
Accuracy of tibial component positioning in the robotic arm assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of MAKO robotic-assisted and manual unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of radiographic precision and short-term functional results.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic-Assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty restores native joint line height and reduces alignment outliers.International orthopaedics · 2025Pooled it
- Image-Based Robotic Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Results in Fewer Radiologic Outliers with No Impact on Revision Rates Compared to Imageless Systems: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Targeted adjustment of the posterior tibial slope in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is feasible without altering the medial proximal tibial angle.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- The Deep-MCL Line: A Reliable Anatomical Landmark to Optimize the Tibial Cut in UKA.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- How reproducible are clinical measurements in robotic knee surgery?Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Short-Term Outcomes of Robotic Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: An Indian Perspective.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Image-based robot assisted bicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty.SICOT-J · 2022Article
- Accuracy in the Execution of Pre-operative Plan for Limb Alignment and Implant Positioning in Robotic-arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty and Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Observational Study.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2021Article
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
backgroundOur study aims to determine the planned accuracy of the tibial component placement in robotic arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) versus the conventional jig based UKA of the initial cases done in India for the first time with this particular robotic system.Materials & Methods: Study group 1 consisted of patients who underwent robotic arm (MAKO, Stryker, USA) assisted UKA. Group 2 consists of patients who underwent a standard conventional jig based (Oxford knee, Biomet, UK). Post-operative radiographs were taken to determine the Tibial Implant position and orientation which were compared to their preoperative plan respectively by two independent observers. The mean error value was obtained for both study groups respectively and compared to determine the accuracy of the post-operative tibial implant placement.
resultsIn the Robotic arm assisted UKA, the deviation of post-operative varus angle from preoperative planned angle was about 0.43° and post-operative Tibial slope alignment differed from preoperative plan was 0.41°. In the Conventional UKA group post-operative varus angle differed from preoperative planned angle by about 2.12° and post-operative Tibial slope alignment deviation from preoperative plan was 2.47°.
conclusionsRobotic arm assisted system was more accurate compared to the conventional jig-based technique in achieving the planned orientation and alignment of the tibial implant in the initial learning phase of this particular Robotic System used for the first time in India. MESH TERMS: partial knee replacement, robotic assisted surgery.
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.