Robot assisted compared to conventional knee arthroplasty: metanalysis and systematic review.

Robot-assisted total knee replacement has emerged as a promising technology in bone surgery, offering further precision and accuracy compared to manual methods. This advancement shows potential benefits for better patient outcomes. The PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed to ensure a transparent, systematic, and reproducible evaluation of all included studies. This method helped review research properly. Comparative studies and controlled trials related to robot-assisted knee arthroplasty compared to conventional knee arthroplasty were found using multiple database searching (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science). The search strategy enabled identification of relevant studies. The study showed that robotic knee surgery had significantly better post-operative anatomical and mechanical restoration compared to the regular surgery methods. However, clinical and functional results were similar between both groups, and the complication rates themselves showed no further difference. Robot-assisted knee replacement surgery showed better accuracy and fewer alignment problems compared to conventional manual TKA. Regarding short-term results, patients had better outcomes with robot-assisted methods. Total Knee Arthroplasty itself became cost-effective when case volume was further increased beyond 49 cases per year. Although Robot-assisted knee surgery provides better accuracy in component positioning and alignment, the actual patient outcomes and knee function remain comparable to traditional surgery methods in short and medium-term follow-up. The technology shows promise; however, longer-term studies are required to determine whether these improvements translate into superior clinical outcomes. The cost-effectiveness only depends on how many cases the hospital manages and how well they organize their work processes.