ArticleCureus2026
Multiple Robotic-Assisted Systems Versus Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparison of Two-Year Clinical Outcomes.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile robotic-assisted (RA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) offers improved precision in bone resection and implant alignment, disagreement exists regarding its clinical benefit compared to conventional TKA (conv-TKA), particularly concerning patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Multiple RA-TKA systems are in use, yet few studies compare outcomes among these systems. We aimed to report differences in clinical outcomes among two RA-TKA systems (i.e., Mako®, ROSA®) and conv-TKA.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included TKAs performed by a single fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon from January 1, 2016, to April 14, 2023. The electronic health record was reviewed for patient demographics and postoperative complications. PROMs (Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS)) were collected preoperatively and postoperatively (six months, one year, and two years) and analyzed using adjusted pairwise t-tests. Complication and revision rates were summarized using descriptive statistics.
resultsA total of 167 primary TKAs (n = 74 Mako, n = 29 ROSA, n = 64 conv-TKA) were included. At the six-month follow-up, the ROSA-TKA cohort had a significantly lower OKS than the conv-TKA cohort (-4.38, p = 0.042). Similarly, the Mako-TKA cohort had a significantly higher OKS than the ROSA-TKA cohort (4.79, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in PROMs at the remaining follow-ups or in other pairwise comparisons. There was no statistically significant difference among groups in 90-day complications or TKA revisions.
conclusionsSurgeons can achieve comparable clinical outcomes using various RA-TKA systems or conventional implants, without increased complications or revisions, while leveraging the enhanced implant placement accuracy of RA-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.