Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34255170›Full record

ReviewArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2021

Robotics in orthopaedic surgery: why, what and how?

Bernardo Innocenti, Edoardo Bori

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Digital operating room-From dream to workflow].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Shoulder arthroplasty in the elderly.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025
    Article
  14. Robot-assisted shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Bernardo InnocentiBEAMS Department, Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems, École Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Av. F. Roosevelt, 50 CP165/56, 1050, Bruxelles, Belgium. bernardo.innocenti@ulb.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8992-8865
Edoardo BoriBEAMS Department, Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems, École Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Av. F. Roosevelt, 50 CP165/56, 1050, Bruxelles, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRobotics applied to orthopedics has become an interesting topic both from the surgical point of view and the engineering one. The main goal of those systems is the enhancement of joint arthroplasty surgery, providing the robotic support to precisely and accurately prepare the bone, restore the limb alignment and the physiological kinematics of the joint. Various robotic systems are currently available on the market, each addressing specific kind of surgeries and characterized by a series of specific features that may involve different requirements and/or modus operandi. MATERIAL AND

methodsAn overview of these devices was performed, addressing the different categories in which robots are subdivided in terms of: operations performed, requirements and level of interaction of the surgeon. The main models currently available on the market were addressed and relative studies in the literature were reported and compared, to highlight the benefits and drawbacks of the different technologies.

resultsThe different robotic systems were subdivided in: open/closed platform, image-based/imageless and active/passive/semi-active. Regardless of the typology of robotic system, the main aim is to improve precision and accuracy of the operation. It is to be noted that, regardless of the typology of robotic system, the surgeon is still in charge of the planning and approval of the operation: only the precise and consistent execution of his directives is entrusted to the robot. The positive factors have however to be weighed against the fact that robotic systems involve an important initial investment and most of the times require the surgeons and the staff to learn how to operate them (with a learning curve differing from system to system).

conclusionsEach surgeon, when considering if and which robotic system to adopt, has to properly evaluate the different benefits and drawbacks involved to find the surgical robot that fits his needs the best.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeOrthopedic ProceduresOrthopedicsRoboticsHumansLearning CurveRobotic surgeryRobotic systemsTHATKAUKA

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.