ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Introduction of robotics into a well-established navigation OR team for TKA does not increase surgical time. A one center evaluation.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty (RA-TKA) enhances precision but is historically associated with increased operative times and workflow disruption. This study evaluates whether integrating a novel open-platform robotic effector into an established, familiar navigation workflow mitigates the learning curve and maintains total operative time compared to standard navigation. A retrospective comparative analysis was performed on 236 primary TKAs (142 NAV-TKA vs. 94 RA-TKA) performed by a single high-volume surgical team. Operative times were segmented into five phases using synchronized system logs. Educational cases were excluded. The learning curve was analyzed using Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) control charts. Multi-way analysis across independent cohorts showed a significant global variation in total skin-to-skin time (p < 0.001). However, post-hoc pairwise testing demonstrated that while the initial learning phase was significantly longer (Median: 84.00 min), the steady-state proficiency phase (Median: 77.00 min) achieved a comparable time profile to the legacy navigation workflow (Median: 81.00 min; p > 0.017), avoiding an overall sustained time penalty. CUSUM analysis identified a learning curve of 58 cases. In the proficiency phase, the active robotic resection time was significantly faster than manual navigated resection (17.95 vs. 19.08 min; p = 0.009). The open-platform robotic system successfully integrated into the clinical workflow without introducing an overall sustained time penalty. Retaining a familiar interface effectively cushions the initial efficiency loss typical of closed platforms. Once proficiency is attained, active robotic assistance significantly enhances mechanical resection speed, offsetting the mandatory intra-operative planning time investment.
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.