ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2025
Pain and pain management following manual versus robotic assisted unicondylar knee arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The adoption of robotic assistance for unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) is increasing, driven by reports of improved implant positioning. However, its impact on short-term patient outcomes remains debated. This study aimed to compare postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and length of hospital stay between manual (maUKA) and robotic-assisted (raUKA) procedures in a large, real-world cohort. Materials and methods: We retrospectively identified 1369 opioid-naïve patients undergoing medial, unilateral UKA at a single institution between 2019 and 2023 (417 manual, 952 robotic). We collected data on Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS) scores, opioid consumption in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), and length of hospital stay. Multivariable linear regression was used to compare outcomes while controlling for patient-level confounders. Results: After multivariable adjustment, we found no statistically significant difference between the manual and robotic groups in length of hospital stay (p = 0.6206) or total 90-day opioid consumption. Patients in the raUKA group reported slightly higher pain scores at the first postoperative measurement (Estimate -0.7, p < 0.001); however, no significant differences were observed in average, minimum, or maximum in-hospital pain scores. There was no significant difference in total inpatient opioid consumption. Conclusion: In this large single-institution analysis, robotic assistance was not associated with improvements in postoperative pain, opioid use, or length of hospital stay compared to the manual technique. These findings suggest that potential benefits of robotic UKA related to implant accuracy may not translate to improved short-term clinical outcomes, a crucial consideration in the context of technology acquisition and healthcare costs.
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.