SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2025
Mid- to long-term complications and revision rates of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Postoperative activity participation and functional recovery after robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Early clinical, radiological, and safety outcomes of NAVIO-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of MAKO robotic-assisted and manual unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of radiographic precision and short-term functional results.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Global research landscape and trends in robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a bibliometric analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with lower odds of prolonged hospitalization and no higher odds of high-charge admission during the index hospitalization.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
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
Objective: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a commonly performed procedure for patients with isolated osteoarthritis (OA). In recent years, robotic-assisted UKA (RAUKA) has raised concerns regarding its revision rates and risk of complications. This study aims to compare the mid- to long-term complications and revision rates between RAUKA and traditional UKA, providing evidence to support its clinical application. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of studies comparing complication and revision rates between RAUKA and traditional UKA, with a minimum average follow-up duration of three years. Comprehensive searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, with a cutoff date of October 1, 2024. The outcome measures analyzed included complications, revision rate, postoperative aseptic loosening, fractures, malalignment, pain, and OA. Results: Six studies were included, encompassing 48,091 knee cases, with follow-up durations ranging from 36-106.4 months. RAUKA significantly reduced the overall complication rate (odds ratio: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.11-0.63, Conclusions: This study is the first to include mid- to long-term follow-up (≥3 years) data comparing RAUKA and traditional UKA. The findings indicate that RAUKA outperforms traditional UKA in terms of overall complication and revision rates, with a lower incidence of key complications such as postoperative aseptic loosening and fractures. RAUKA appears to be a safer surgical option for OA patients, supporting its broader clinical application. However, further long-term, multicenter studies are needed to fully validate its efficacy and long-term safety. Systematic Review Registration: identifier [ID CRD42024605539].
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.