ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Robot-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a retrospective comparative study of postoperative complications.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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 knee arthroplasty: systems, alignment strategies, and future directions.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an established procedure for selected patients with unicompartmental osteoarthritis. Robotic-assisted UKA (RA-UKA) has been introduced to improve accuracy of implant positioning. However, its clinical advantage over conventional UKA remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare postoperative complications between robotic-assisted and conventional techniques.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent primary UKA between 2012 and 2022, with ≥ 2 years of follow-up. Group allocation was determined by calendar period and robotic platform availability: conventional UKA was performed before adoption of the robotic system, whereas robotic-assisted UKA (RA-UKA) was performed after its introduction in 2018. Demographic, surgical, and complication data were analyzed. Due to the small number of events, statistical comparisons are exploratory and underpowered.
resultsA total of 208 patients underwent UKA, of whom 190 (91.3%) were available at follow-up. The mean age was 65.7 years (SD 10.7), and 52.6% were women. Eighty-four procedures (44.3%) were RA-UKA. Ten complications (5.2%) occurred; arthrofibrosis was the most frequent complication (n = 2), followed by deep vein thrombosis (n = 1). One intraoperative periprosthetic fracture was observed in the conventional group. Complication rates were 1.2% in RA-UKA versus 8.5% in conventional UKA (p = 0.29), but this difference did not reach statistical significance. Notably, comorbidities were more prevalent in the RA-UKA group (50% vs. 7.6%).
conclusionUKA demonstrated a low complication rate at two-year follow-up. While fewer events were observed after RA-UKA, this study is underpowered and no statistically significant differences were found. These findings reinforce the overall safety of UKA but do not provide evidence of superiority of robotic assistance. Larger, prospective studies are required to clarify whether RA-UKA offers clinically meaningful benefits. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.