ArticleArthroplasty (London, England)2026
Comparison of the learning curves of the osteotomy guide robot and guide plate-based robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty (London, England), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared the learning curves and clinical outcomes of osteotomy guide robot and guide plate-based robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom January to May 2023, 100 patients were prospectively enrolled to receive either a guide plate-based robot or an osteotomy guide robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty. The thickness of the osteotomy planned by the robot and the actual thickness were recorded in real time during the operation, as was the time taken for each step in the operation, including bone registration and osteotomy. The SF-12, HSS score, and FJS of the patients before surgery and 6 weeks and 24 months after surgery were also collected.
resultsFor surgeon 1, the average operating time with the guide plate-based robot and osteotomy guide robot was 98.16 ± 9.68 and 118.52 ± 15.95 min, respectively; the difference was significant. The average time of the last 10 cases was shorter than that of the first 10 cases. The inflection points of the osteotomy learning curve of surgeon 1 with two robotic systems were at case 5 and case 9. The average operative times for Surgeon 2's two robotic surgery groups were 104.52 ± 12.65 min and 105.76 ± 33.03 min, respectively. The inflection points of the osteotomy learning curves using the two robotic systems occurred at case 13, respectively. Patients who underwent guide plate-based robot or osteotomy guide robot-assisted TKA had similarly improved knee recovery, reflected in the SF-12, HSS score, and FJS.
conclusionsThere was no significant difference in the osteotomy learning curve between the two robotic systems. The improvement in knee functional recovery was similar after the guide plate-based robot and the osteotomy guide robot-assisted TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
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.