ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026
Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty in Complex Primary and Revision Cases: A Systematic Review.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: accuracy, clinical outcomes, complications, learning curve and cost-effectiveness: a critical clinical review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis study systematically reviews outcomes of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) in complex primary and revision cases, compared with conventional TKA (cTKA). Complex cases include severe coronal deformity, high BMI, fixed flexion deformity, and revision arthroplasty. Outcomes assessed included coronal alignment, perioperative metrics, and patient-reported outcomes. RECENT
findingsNineteen studies comprising 2,482 patients (2,535 knees: 1,931 rTKA, 604 cTKA) were included. Robotic-assisted TKA consistently restored coronal alignment, with greatest improvements observed in moderate-to-severe varus and valgus deformities. In revision cases, robotic assistance achieved near-neutral hip-knee-ankle alignment (mean deviation - 1.05°), low complication rates (4-17.9%), and high implant survival (97.1%). In obese patients, robotic-assisted TKA improved alignment precision, though functional outcomes were similar to conventional techniques. Robotic systems reduced the need for extensive soft tissue releases and enabled reliable early functional recovery. Most studies were retrospective, with moderate-to-serious risk of bias due to confounding and heterogeneity in patient populations, surgical complexity, and robotic platforms. Robotic-assisted TKA reliably restored coronal alignment and achieved perioperative andpatient-reported outcomes comparable to conventional techniques in complex primary andrevision cases. Alignment advantages were particularly evident in severe deformities oranatomically challenging knees. While these findings are encouraging, they should be3interpreted in the context of predominantly retrospective data, heterogeneous outcomereporting, and limited long-term follow-up. Future prospective, longitudinal randomizedstudies with standardized reporting are needed to confirm the impact of robotic-assistedapproaches on long-term functional outcomes and implant survival, in complex TKA.
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.