ReviewCureus2025
A Comparison of Operative Time Between Robotic Surgical Assistant (ROSA) and MAKO Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robot-assisted vs. navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the latest controlled studies based on perioperative, functional, and radiographic outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: accuracy, clinical outcomes, complications, learning curve and cost-effectiveness: a critical clinical review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Early outcomes and the learning curve of two domestically produced surgical robot systems with different operational philosophies for total knee arthroplasty.Journal of robotic 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) represents a modern surgical approach that seeks to enhance implant precision and alignment compared to traditional methods. The Robotic Surgical Assistant (ROSA) and MAKO platforms represent two prominent systems used in robotic surgery. A systematic search of PubMed and Embase was performed through December 2024 to identify comparative studies of ROSA and MAKO robotic systems in TKA. Eligible studies reported operative time outcomes. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each study. Pooled analyses were conducted using both fixed-effect and random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I². Three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a combined sample of 1,222 patients. The fixed-effects model showed a small but statistically insignificant pooled effect favoring ROSA (Hedges' g = 0.21, standard error = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.07 to 0.50), corresponding to approximately 6-7 minutes shorter operative time. The random-effects model demonstrated a similar trend, though non-significant due to high heterogeneity (Q = 20.07, p < 0.001, I² = 90%). Funnel plot analysis revealed no evidence of publication bias. The meta-analysis indicates that ROSA might result in shorter surgical times than MAKO during TKA procedures, although statistically insignificant. The results are restricted by substantial heterogeneity between studies and the limited number of available studies.
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.