Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34058870›Full record

Trial reportThe bone & joint journal2021

Robotic arm-assisted versus conventional medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: five-year clinical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial.

Matthew Banger, James Doonan, Philip Rowe, Bryn Jones, Angus MacLean, Mark J B Blyth

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The bone & joint journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.0field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. High variation among clinical studies in the assessment of physical function after knee replacement: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: evidence from a national database.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew BangerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6672-5379
James DoonanDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Philip RoweDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Bryn JonesDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Angus MacLeanDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Mark J B BlythDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Glasgow Royal Infirmary · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsUnicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a bone-preserving treatment option for osteoarthritis localized to a single compartment in the knee. The success of the procedure is sensitive to patient selection and alignment errors. Robotic arm-assisted UKA provides technological assistance to intraoperative bony resection accuracy, which is thought to improve ligament balancing. This paper presents the five-year outcomes of a comparison between manual and robotically assisted UKAs.

methodsThe trial design was a prospective, randomized, parallel, single-centre study comparing surgical alignment in patients undergoing UKA for the treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis (ISRCTN77119437). Participants underwent surgery using either robotic arm-assisted surgery or conventional manual instrumentation. The primary outcome measure (surgical accuracy) has previously been reported, and, along with secondary outcomes, were collected at one-, two-, and five-year timepoints. Analysis of five-year results and longitudinal analysis for all timepoints was performed to compare the two groups.

resultsOverall, 104 (80%) patients of the original 130 who received surgery were available at five years (55 robotic, 49 manual). Both procedures reported successful results over all outcomes. At five years, there were no statistical differences between the groups in any of the patient reported or clinical outcomes. There was a lower reintervention rate in the robotic arm-assisted group with 0% requiring further surgery compared with six (9%) of the manual group requiring additional surgical intervention (p < 0.001).

conclusionThis study has shown excellent clinical outcomes in both groups with no statistical or clinical differences in the patient-reported outcome measures. The notable difference was the lower reintervention rate at five years for roboticarm-assisted UKA when compared with a manual approach. Cite this article:

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingAdultAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePain MeasurementPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularKnee arthroplastyRobotic arm-assistedUKAUnicompartmental

Identifiers

PMID34058870
PMCPMC8153511
OpenAlexW3165545165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.