Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39294530›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024

Does patient-specific instrument or robot improve imaging and functional outcomes in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? A bayesian analysis.

Xufeng Jiao, Mincong Du, Qi Li, Cheng Huang, Ran Ding, Weiguo Wang

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

Xufeng JiaoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, P.R. China.
Mincong DuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China.
Qi LiChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, P.R. China.
Cheng HuangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, P.R. China.
Ran DingDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, P.R. China.
Weiguo WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, P.R. China. jointwwg@163.com.

Funding

National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding 2023-NHLHCRF-YXHZ-ZRZD-04National Natural Science Foundation of China 82372426
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis study conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the imaging and functional outcomes of patient-specific instrument-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (P-UKA), robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (R-UKA), and conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (C-UKA). MATERIALS AND

methodsA comprehensive search was performed on five electronic databases and major orthopedic journals as of September 24, 2023. We included randomized controlled studies featuring at least two interventions of P-UKA, R-UKA, or C-UKA. Primary outcomes encompassed the deviation angle of hip-knee-ankle angle, as well as the coronal and sagittal plane alignment of femoral and tibial components. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcome measures (PROM), surgery time, revision rate, and complication rate. Bayesian framework was employed for risk ratio (RR) or mean deviation (MD) analysis, and treatment hierarchy was established based on rank probabilities.

resultsThis NMA included 871 knees from 12 selected studies. In sagittal plane, R-UKA exhibited a significantly reduced deviation angle of femoral component compared to P-UKA (MD: 4.16, 95% CI: 0.21, 8.07), and of tibial component in comparison to C-UKA (MD: -2.45, 95% CI: -4.20, -0.68). Notably, the surgery time was significantly longer in R-UKA than in C-UKA (MD: 15.98, 95% CI: 3.11, 28.88). However, no significant differences were observed in other outcomes.

conclusionCompared with P-UKA or C-UKA, R-UKA significantly improves the femoral and tibial component alignment in the sagittal plane, although this does not translate into discernible differences in functional outcomes. Comprehensive considerations of economic and learning costs are imperative for the judicious selection of the appropriate procedure.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBayes TheoremRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresTreatment OutcomeBayesian analysisPatient-specific instrumentRobotUnicompartmental knee 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.