Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38229867›Full record

ArticleArthroplasty today2024

A Three-dimensional Comparison of Pre- and Post-component Position in a Series of Off-label Robotic-assisted Revision Total Knee Arthroplasties.

Micah MacAskill, Richard Peluso, Jonathan Lash, Timothy E Hewett, Matthew Bullock, Alexander Caughran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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.

Micah MacAskillDepartment of Orthopaedics, Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Huntington, WV, USA.
Richard PelusoDepartment of Orthopaedics, Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Huntington, WV, USA.
Jonathan LashDepartment of Orthopaedics, Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Huntington, WV, USA.
Timothy E HewettDepartment of Orthopaedics, Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Huntington, WV, USA.
Matthew BullockDepartment of Orthopaedics, Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Huntington, WV, USA.
Alexander CaughranDepartment of Orthopaedics, Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Huntington, WV, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The application of robotic-assisted arthroplasty in revision knee scenarios continues to evolve. This study compares the pre- and post-revision implant positions in series of revision total knee arthroplasties (TKA) using a robotic arm system. Methods: Twenty-five consecutive off-label robotic-assisted revision TKA were performed. After virtual revision femoral and tibial components were positioned to achieve "balanced" medial and lateral flexion and extension gaps, the existing primary implants (PI) were removed, and bone cuts were executed with the robotic arm system. Preoperative coronal, sagittal, and axial position of the PI was compared to the final planned positions of the robotic revision implants (RRI) for each subject. A repeated measures ANOVA using the absolute difference in millimeters and degrees between the PI and RRI orientation was completed. Results: Intra-operatively, the virtual gaps were balanced within the planning software followed by successful execution of the plan. There was a statistically significant difference between posterior condylar offset and tibial component positioning for RRI compared to PI. There was no difference between the distal femoral component values between PI and RRI. Conclusions: The sagittal alignment of the revision implants, specifically the femoral posterior condylar offset and tibial component slope, are statistically significant considerations for a stable revision TKA with off-label use of a robotic-arm system. Other potential benefits may include appropriate implant sizing which can affect the resultant ligamentous tension important for a functional revision TKA. Future research and software iterations will be needed to determine the overall accuracy and utility of robotic-assisted revision TKA.

Indexed as

Condylar offsetKnee replacementRevisionRobotic assistedSagittal alignment

Identifiers

PMID38229867
PMCPMC10788208

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.