Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35984537›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2022

Unsatisfactory accuracy of recent robotic assisting system ROSA for total knee arthroplasty.

Caleb Shin, Chelsea Crovetti, Enshuo Huo, David Lionberger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. High in-vivo accuracy of a novel robotic-arm-assisted system for total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  13. Reproducibility of a new device for robotic-assisted TKA surgery.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Autonomous Robotic Systems in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.Otolaryngologic clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  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.

Caleb ShinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6445 Main St, Houston, TX, USA. calebpshin@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0118-5425
Chelsea CrovettiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6445 Main St, Houston, TX, USA.
Enshuo HuoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6445 Main St, Houston, TX, USA.
David LionbergerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6445 Main St, Houston, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to quantify accuracy of a recently FDA-approved robotic-assisted device.

methodsThirty-seven patients underwent TKA with the Robotic Surgical Assistant (ROSA) by the same operating surgeon and team over the course of 3 months. Intra-operative mechanical axis measurements, composed of alpha (α), beta (β), gamma (γ), and delta (δ) angles, and the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) were calculated by the ROSA. Post-operative mechanical implant angles were taken from 36″ stitched post-op films and measured in the PACS imaging system. Accuracy was assessed by comparing the percentage of postoperative long length films within 2° and 3° of the ROSA intra-operative plan.

resultsThe ROSA system accurately calculated the HKA, α, and β angles (95% CI), but was inaccurate in calculating both γ and δ angles. Using a window of ± 3° accuracy, the HKA, α and β angles were accurate at levels of 89, 100 and 92% respectively. In contrast, the sagittal relationships were considerably less accurate at 77 and 74% for the γ and δ angles respectively. Subsequently, the proportion of cases within 2 and 3 degrees of the intra-operative plan for resection angles was considered accurate for HKA (73% within 2°, 89% within 3°), α (92% within 2°, 100% within 3°), and β (76% within 2°, 92% within 3°) angles, but considered inaccurate for γ (51% within 2°, 77% within 3°) and δ angles (57% within 2°, 74% within 3°).

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that while the ROSA system seems to accurately predict coronal plane resections in TKA, it falls short in the sagittal plane. Further research in these deficiencies can provide insight into the overall efficacy of robotic assisted surgery in TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Therapeutic Study.

Indexed as

Clinical studyComputer assisted surgeryHip-knee-ankle angleMechanical axisRobotic surgical assistantTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID35984537
PMCPMC9391541

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.