Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35688590›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Robotic-assisted surgery and kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty (RASKAL study): a protocol of a national registry-nested, multicentre, 2×2 factorial randomised trial assessing clinical, intraoperative, functional, radiographic and survivorship outcomes.

Samuel J MacDessi, Gregory C Wernecke, Durga Bastiras, Tamara Hooper, Emma Heath, Michelle Lorimer, Ian Harris, RASKAL Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Samuel J MacDessiOrthopaedics, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia samuelmacdessi@sydneyknee.com.au.
Gregory C WerneckeSydney Knee Specialists, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
Durga BastirasAustralian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1024-7923
Tamara HooperAustralian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Emma HeathSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Michelle LorimerSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ian HarrisUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
RASKAL Study Group
Australian Orthopaedic Association · AUSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute · AUUNSW Sydney · AUSydney Hernia Specialists Clinic · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRobot-assisted surgery (RAS) and kinematic alignment (KA) are being increasingly adopted to improve patient outcomes in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There is uncertainty around the individual or combined effect of these concepts compared with computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and mechanical alignment (MA), respectively. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of RAS, KA or both to improve clinical outcomes, functional measures, radiographic precision and prosthetic survivorship when compared with current gold standards of surgical care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A national registry-nested, multicentre, double-blinded, 2×2 factorial, randomised trial will be undertaken with 300 patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA performed by 15 surgeons. The primary outcome will be the between-group differences in postoperative change over 2 years in the mean Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS-12), comparing first, RAS to CAS as its control, and second, KA to MA as its control. Secondary outcomes will include other knee-specific and general health patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), intraoperative pressure loads as a measure of soft tissue balance, 6-month postoperative functional outcomes, radiological precision using CT imaging, complications and long-term prosthetic survivorship. The contribution of each patient's unique coronal plane alignment of the knee phenotype to primary and secondary PROMs will be investigated. OMERACT-OARSI criteria and Patient Acceptable Symptom State outcome score thresholds for the KOOS-12 and Oxford Knee Score will be used in secondary analyses. Primary intention-to-treat and secondary per-protocol analyses will be performed. Statistical analysis will include a generalised linear mixed model for repeated measures for continuous KOOS-12 scores. Kaplan-Meier estimates with adjusted HRs of implant survivorship will be calculated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from Sydney Local Health District-Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (Approval X20-0494 and 2020/ETH02896 10.24/DEC20). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented in national, state and international meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621000205831.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisOsteoarthritis, KneeRobotic Surgical ProceduresBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansKnee JointMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegistriesSurvivorshipTreatment Outcomecomputer-assisted surgerykinematic alignmentmechanical alignmentrandomised trialrobotic-assisted surgerytotal knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID35688590
PMCPMC9189838
OpenAlexW4281867414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.