ReviewJournal of orthopaedics
Comparing clinical and radiographic outcomes of robotic-assisted, computer-navigated and conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 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
- Mid- to long-term complications and revision rates of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Substantial improvement in short-term survivorship in patients receiving robotic arm-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : a retrospective cohort study.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Favorable midterm clinical results of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty guided by coronal limb alignment using an image-free navigation system.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Conventional mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty effectively achieves personalised alignment: A single surgeon series of 2472 knees.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
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
introductionThe purpose was to compare robotic assisted (RA), computer navigated (CN), and conventional UKA techniques.
methodsDatabases were queried for data on study characteristics, UKA systems, complications, and tibiofemoral alignment.
resultsFour RA and six CN RCTs were identified. No significant differences were found in operative time, tibiofemoral alignment, and reoperation rates when comparing RA or CN to conventional UKA. RA UKA resulted in a significantly lower risk of complications compared to conventional UKA.
conclusionsRA UKA results in fewer complications than conventional UKA with a clinically significant increase in operative time. All groups were similar in remaining evaluated parameters.
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.