Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37270464›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2023

Robotic-assisted mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty does not lead to better clinical and radiological outcomes when compared to conventional TKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Alessandro Bensa, Alessandro Sangiorgio, Luca Deabate, Andrea Illuminati, Benedetta Pompa, Giuseppe Filardo

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  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. Article
  19. Review
  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.

Alessandro BensaService of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Via Tesserete 46, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Alessandro SangiorgioService of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Via Tesserete 46, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Luca DeabateService of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Via Tesserete 46, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Andrea IlluminatiIRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132, Milano, Italy.
Benedetta PompaService of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Via Tesserete 46, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland. benedetta.pompa@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3658-0567
Giuseppe FilardoService of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Via Tesserete 46, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRobotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (R-TKA) has emerged as an alternative to improve the results of the conventional manual TKA (C-TKA). The aim of this study was to analyse the high-level studies comparing R-TKA and C-TKA in terms of clinical outcomes, radiological results, perioperative parameters, and complications.

methodsThe literature search was conducted on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science) on 1 February 2023 according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials (RCTs), written in English language, published in the last 15 years, focusing on the comparison of C-TKA and R-TKA results. The quality of each article was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials version 2 (RoB 2). The statistical analysis was carried out using random effects (DerSimonian & Laird) for weighted mean difference (MD) of the continuous variables and Peto method for odds ratios of the dichotomous variables.

resultsAmong the 2905 articles retrieved, 14 RCTs on 12 series of patients treated with mechanically aligned implants were included. A total of 2255 patients (25.1% males and 74.9% females; mean age 62.9 ± 3.0; mean BMI 28.1 ± 1.3) were analysed. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis showed that R-TKA did not provide overall superior results compared to C-TKA in mechanically aligned implants in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes. R-TKA showed longer operative time (MD = 15.3 min, p = 0.004) and similar complication rates compared to C-TKA. A statistically significant difference in favour of R-TKA was found in the posterior-stabilized subgroup in terms of radiological outcomes (hip-knee-ankle angle MD = 1.7, p < 0.001) compared to C-TKA, although without resulting in appreciable difference of clinical outcomes.

conclusionR-TKA did not provide overall superior results compared to C-TKA in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes, showing longer operative time and similar complication rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeOsteoarthritis, KneeRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansKnee JointKnee ProsthesisOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAlignmentConventionalKneeMechanical alignmentOutcomesRoboticTKATotal 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.