ArticleBMC surgery2025
Robotic-assisted vs. traditional medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction: a comparative study of surgical precision and clinical outcomes.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the feasibility and clinical effectiveness of reconstructing the Medial Patellofemoral Ligament (MPFL) using robotic-assisted reconstruction.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study encompassed 46 patients who underwent medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction at Yichang People's Hospital between January 2022 and January 2024. Patients were categorized into a conventional surgery group (control group, n = 24) and a robot-assisted surgery group (experimental group, n = 22) based on whether robotic assistance was used during the procedure. The primary endpoints included the error margin between the femoral tunnel entry point, a predefined reference landmark, and the quantity of intraoperative fluoroscopic exposures. Secondary endpoints consisted of knee function scores at postoperative and final follow-up evaluations, patellar stability, operative duration, length of hospital stay, and intraoperative blood loss.
resultsThe experimental group demonstrated a significantly higher degree of precision in femoral tunnel placement than the control group, as indicated by a smaller mean distance from the tunnel entry point to the reference landmark (P < 0.05). Additionally, the experimental group markedly reduced intraoperative fluoroscopic exposures relative to the control group (P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding postoperative or final follow-up patellar stability or knee function scores (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the experimental group incurred significantly shorter hospital stays and experienced less intraoperative blood loss than the control group (P < 0.05). At the same time, the operative time did not present any significant differences between groups (P > 0.05).
conclusionRobot-assisted MPFL reconstruction significantly enhances femoral tunnel positioning accuracy and surgical efficiency compared to conventional methods. This approach offers a promising surgical option for improving precision and efficiency in the management of recurrent patellar dislocation, with potential implications for future research.
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.