Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35207672›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022

Comparative Cost Analysis of Four Different Computer-Assisted Technologies to Implant a Total Knee Arthroplasty over Conventional Instrumentation.

Bernhard Christen, Lars Tanner, Max Ettinger, Michel P Bonnin, Peter P Koch, Tilman Calliess

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Learning curve in image-based robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty: a MAKO-robot experience.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. MINARO DRS: usability study of a robotic-assisted laminectomy.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Bernhard ChristenArticon Spezialpraxis für Gelenkchirurgie, Salem-Spital, 3013 Berne, Switzerland.
Lars TannerDepartment of Automotive Engineering, Bern University of Applied Science, Campus Biel, 2502 Biel, Switzerland.
Max EttingerDepartment for Orthopaedic Surgery, Hannover Medical School at Annastift Hospital, 30625 Hanover, Germany.
Michel P BonninCentre Orthopedique Santy, 69008 Lyon, France.
Peter P KochClinic for Orthopedics and Traumatology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, 8400 Winterthur, Switzerland.
Tilman CalliessArticon Spezialpraxis für Gelenkchirurgie, Salem-Spital, 3013 Berne, Switzerland.
Hirslanden Salem-Spital · CHBern University of Applied Sciences · CHCentre Orthopédique Santy · FRKantonsspital Winterthur · CHMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several computer-assisted technologies, such as navigation and robotics, have been introduced to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) in order to increase surgical precision and reduce complications. However, these technologies are often criticized due to the increased costs and effort associated with them; however, comparative data are missing. The aim of the present study was to evaluate differences in intraoperative workflows and the related perioperative cost-profiles of four current computer-assisted technologies, used to implant a TKA, in order to gain a comparison to conventional instrumentation. For the cost analysis, additional preoperative imaging and instruments, increased operating room (OR) and planning-time, and expenditures for technical support of the equipment and disposals were calculated, in comparison to conventional TKA, for (1) standard computer-navigation, (2) patient specific instruments (PSI), (3) image-based robotic assistance, and (4) imageless robotic assistance. Workflows at four expert centers which use these technologies were reviewed by an independent observer. The total cost calculation was based on a 125 TKA per year unit in Switzerland. Computer-navigation resulted in 14 min (+23%) increased surgery time and, overall, USD 650 in additional costs. PSI technology saved 5 min (8%) OR time but it created USD 1520 in expenditures for imaging and disposals. The image-based robotic system was the most expensive technology; it created overall additional costs of USD 2600, which predominately resulted from technical support, disposals, the CT-Scan, and 14 min of increased OR time. The imageless robotic assistance resulted in the largest increase in OR-time, as it resulted in an additional 25 min (+42%) on average. Overall, additional costs of USD 1530 were calculated. Every one of the assistive technologies in this study increased the total cost of TKA when compared to a conventional technique, and the most important variables, related to cost, were technical support and additional disposables. The longer surgical times and additional surgical trays required for the techniques had a marginal effect on overall costs. This comparative cost analysis gives valuable information for future efforts to calculate the real costs of these technologies and the subsequent return on investment of each technique.

Indexed as

cost analysisnavigationpatient-specific instrumentsrobotics

Identifiers

PMID35207672
PMCPMC8880057
OpenAlexW4210683449

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.