Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34491411›Full record

SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2021

Robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty: an evolution in progress. A concise review of the available systems and the data supporting them.

Johanna Elliott, Jobe Shatrov, Brett Fritsch, David Parker

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Learning curve for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Functional alignment in total knee arthroplasty is an umbrella term-A call for better definition and reporting quality!Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Unworn cartilage in total knee arthroplasty strongly deviates from 2 mm: MRI, robotic-assisted and ruler assessment.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The use of an imageless robotic system in revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  15. No difference in surgical time and total theatre time between robotically assisted and computer assisted total knee arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Johanna ElliottSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, 445 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia. jellyott@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4429-9900
Jobe ShatrovSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, 445 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.
Brett FritschSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, 445 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.
David ParkerSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, 445 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA review of the data supporting robotic systems currently available is presented focussing on precision and reproducibility, radiological outcomes, clinical outcomes, and survivorship. MATERIALS AND

methodsScientific literature published on robotic systems for knee arthroplasty was reviewed using the reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were any study involving robotic-assisted UKA or TKA that reported precision of implant positioning or functional outcomes or range of motion or survivorship, including cadaveric or dry bone studies with a minimum of 6-month follow-up.

resultsThirty-nine studies were identified for robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and 24 studies for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Those that reported on radiological outcomes or cadaver studies consistently demonstrated improved precision with the use of robotic systems irrespective of the system. PROMS and survival data demonstrated equivalent short-term results. However, many studies reported outcomes inconsistently and few had long-term clinical follow-up or survivorship data.

conclusionsThis review adds to the body of evidence supporting improved precision and reproducibility with robotic assistance in knee arthroplasty. Despite intensive funding of research into robotic knee systems, there remains considerable heterogeneity in exposure and outcome analysis and few quality long-term studies demonstrating translation to better clinical outcomes and implant survivorship.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeOsteoarthritis, KneeRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansKnee JointReproducibility of ResultsTreatment OutcomeRobotic-arm assistedRobotic-assisted surgeryTotal knee arthroplastyUnicompartmental arthroplasty

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.