Trial reportActa orthopaedica2025
Radiostereometric measurement of implant migration in robotically assisted vs conventional bi-cruciate stabilized cemented total knee arthroplasty: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Acta orthopaedica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative pain relief and functional outcomes following robotic-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a GRADE-assessed meta-analysis with meta-regression of randomized controlled trials.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Computed tomography-based radiostereometric analysis achieves sufficient precision for femoral implants in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Trial
- Review
- Editorial: Why the randomized controlled trial is still at the apex and the gold standard for evaluating new medical and surgical interventions.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeRobotically assisted computer navigation (robotic) has been developed to improve the positioning in total knee arthroplasties (TKAs), attempting to achieve better functional results and longevity of the prostheses. However, the benefit of robotics is still controversial. The aim of our study was to compare migration between robotic and conventional techniques in cemented bi-cruciate stabilized TKAs, using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) based on a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
methodsWe enrolled 60 TKA patients from one hospital (2020-2021), with osteoarthritis or arthritic disease. The patients were examined up to 24 months after the surgery, to estimate the mechanical stability of the tibial component. The maximum total point motion (MTPM) representing the magnitude of migration, the largest negative (subsidence) and positive (lift-off) value for y-translation, and prosthetic rotations were measured. The migration in the 2 groups was compared and the precision evaluated.
results51 RSA marked TKAs were available for a comparison of tibial migration between robotically assisted (n = 26) and conventional operations (n = 25). The MTPM in the first year was 0.44 mm and 0.64 mm, and at 24 months 0.46 mm and 0.75 mm, for the conventional and the robotic groups, respectively. The robotic group migrated more than the conventional group at 2 years, 0.21 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05-0.44; P = 0.01). The overall median MTPM for the investigated implants (both groups) up to 12 months was 0.54 mm (CI 0.44-0.63), and 0.19 mm between 12 and 24 months (CI 0.16-0.22). The magnitude of migration and rotation around the 3 axes was small for both groups, but flexion/extension migration of the tibial component was slightly higher in the robotic group 0.14° (CI 0.00-0.33; P = 0.049).
conclusionMTPM and flexion/extension migrations of the tibial component were higher for the robotic group, up to 24 months. The overall migration pattern for the bi-cruciate stabilized implant was acceptable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.