Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40197345›Full record

ArticleArthroplasty (London, England)2025

Survivorship in robotic total knee arthroplasty compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jiawei Chen, Ryan Wai Keong Loke, Katelyn Kaye-Ling Lim, Barry Wei Loong Tan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Jiawei ChenNational University of Singapore, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Ryan Wai Keong LokeNational University of Singapore, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Katelyn Kaye-Ling LimNational University of Singapore, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Barry Wei Loong TanDepartment of Orthopaedics, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore. barry_wl_tan@nuhs.edu.sg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the gold standard surgical management for end-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA). Robotic TKA (rTKA) was developed to improve bone preparation accuracy and increase reproducibility. In many settings internationally, rTKA systems have significantly higher costs for patients, and survivorship outcomes are unclear. There are several prior meta-analyses, but these focused on clinical and radiologic outcomes, and to our knowledge, none have evaluated survival. Differences in survival between semi-active or active robotic systems are also not well investigated. STUDY

designMeta-analysis.

methodsA random-effects meta-analysis was conducted on comparative studies between robotic-assisted TKAs and conventional TKAs (cTKAs) in patients undergoing TKA for primary knee OA. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS from inception to 19 December 2024. Outcomes assessed were the implant survival in robotic-assisted TKA compared to conventional methods in standard primary knee OA cases, with subgrouping between active and semi-active systems performed. Secondary outcomes included associated complications, post-operative pain scores, and functional outcomes.

resultsA total of 20 comparative studies were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, 2,804 patients underwent cTKA, while 2,599 underwent rTKA. At two years, the pooled survivorship rate was 97.9% (95% CI: 96-99) in the conventional group and 98.3% (95% CI: 96.2-99.2) in the robotic group. There were no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.7). There were no significant differences between the robotic (semi-active) group and the conventional group (P = 0.5) on further unpaired T-Testing. Between 2 and 5 years, pooled survivorship rates in the conventional group were 96.8% (95% CI: 90.3-99) and 97.1% (95% CI: 91.3-99) in the robotic group. There were no significant differences between groups (P = 0.9). At ten years postoperatively, pooled survivorship rates in the conventional group were 96.9% (95% CI: 95-98) and 97.8% (95% CI: 96.7-98.5) in the robotic group. There were no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.3).

conclusionConventional TKA is non-inferior to rTKA at short and long-term follow-up with regard to implant survival, complications, and postoperative pain scores, while rTKA shows subtle improvements in functional outcome measures.

trial registrationCRD42024540997.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyMeta-analysisRobotic; ConventionalTotal knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID40197345
PMCPMC11978122

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.