Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34587803›Full record

Trial reportThe bone & joint journal2021

Early outcomes after robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared with total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized controlled trial.

Mark J G Blyth, Matthew S Banger, James Doonan, Bryn G Jones, Angus D MacLean, Philip J Rowe

Abstract 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 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. [Robotics and computer-assisted surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Mark J G BlythDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Matthew S BangerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6672-5379
James DoonanDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6933-4840
Bryn G JonesDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Angus D MacLeanDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Philip J RoweDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) during the first six weeks and at one year postoperatively.

methodsA per protocol analysis of 76 patients, 43 of whom underwent TKA and 34 of whom underwent bi-UKA, was performed from a prospective, single-centre, randomized controlled trial. Diaries kept by the patients recorded pain, function, and the use of analgesics daily throughout the first week and weekly between the second and sixth weeks. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared preoperatively, and at three months and one year postoperatively. Data were also compared longitudinally and a subgroup analysis was conducted, stratified by preoperative PROM status.

resultsBoth operations were shown to offer comparable outcomes, with no significant differences between the groups across all timepoints and outcome measures. Both groups also had similarly low rates of complications. Subgroup analysis for preoperative psychological state, activity levels, and BMI showed no difference in outcomes between the two groups.

conclusionRobotic arm-assisted, cruciate-sparing bi-UKA offered similar early clinical outcomes and rates of complications to a mechanically aligned TKA, both in the immediate postoperative period and up to one year following surgery. Further work is required to identify which patients with osteoarthritis of the knee will derive benefit from a cruciate-sparing bi-UKA. Cite this article:

Indexed as

AgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGaitHemiarthroplastyHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisKnee ProsthesisMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresanalgesicsArthroplastyBMIclinical outcomesKneeosteoarthritis of the kneeOutcomespatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)Randomized controlled trialRandomized Controlled TrialRobotic armRobotic-assisted surgerytotal knee arthroplasty (TKA)Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA)

Identifiers

PMID34587803
PMCPMC9948427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.