Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40655252›Full record

ReviewJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025

Evaluation of the learning curve in robot-assisted knee arthroplasty: A Systematic review.

Emidio Di Gialleonardo, Guido Bocchino, Giacomo Capece, Matteo Salvini, Marco Barbaliscia, Giuseppe Malerba, Omar El Ezzo, Giulio Maccauro, Raffaele Vitiello

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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. Article
  3. Learning curve in image-based robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty: a MAKO-robot experience.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Observational
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Emidio Di GialleonardoDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Guido BocchinoDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Giacomo CapeceDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9565-6691
Matteo SalviniDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Marco BarbalisciaDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Giuseppe MalerbaDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Omar El EzzoDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Giulio MaccauroDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.
Raffaele VitielloDepartment of Orthopedics and Geriatric Sciences Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Robot-assisted (RA) surgery has transformed total knee arthroplasties (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA) by significantly enhancing the accuracy of prosthetic implantation and reducing complications. Different robotic systems offer unique approaches to assist surgeons during procedures. Methods: This systematic review adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and evaluated the learning curve associated with RA technologies, focusing on their surgical efficacy. A comprehensive literature search identified and analysed studies published since 2010, ultimately selecting 28 relevant articles that addressed robotic techniques in knee arthroplasty. Results: The findings indicate that surgeons generally require an average of 21 procedures to achieve proficiency with robotic techniques. However, the learning curve varies among robotic systems: MAKO requires 15-25 cases, ROSA 20-30 cases and NAVIO 18-28 cases for surgeons to reach proficiency. The MAKO system emerged as the most frequently used (33.3% of studies), followed by ROSA (23.3%) and NAVIO (16.7%). Evidence suggests that the adoption of these robotic systems is associated with reduced operative times and lower rates of postoperative complications, thereby improving overall surgical outcomes. Conclusions: RA arthroplasties present significant advancements in surgical precision and patient outcomes. With targeted investments in training and technology, the adoption of robotic techniques could further increase, ultimately enhancing the quality of orthopaedic care and patient recovery. This review highlights the importance of addressing training needs and resource allocation to fully realise the potential of robotic surgery in knee arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: Not applicable, systematic review.

Indexed as

arthroplastykneelearning curveroboticTKA

Identifiers

PMID40655252
PMCPMC12255939

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.