ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Posterior tibial slope accuracy in robotic-assisted TKA: a risk factor analysis focusing on CPAK phenotypes.
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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) demonstrates high precision in coronal plane alignment, its accuracy in the sagittal plane-particularly in restoring the planned posterior tibial slope (PTS)-remains suboptimal, and the influence of coronal plane alignment phenotypes on sagittal alignment accuracy is poorly understood. This dual-center, retrospective study analyzed 194 patients undergoing RA-TKA with a constrained kinematic alignment strategy. Sagittal accuracy was assessed using ΔPTS, defined as the deviation between the planned and postoperative PTS measurements, and patients were stratified into high-accuracy (ΔPTS ≤ ± 2°) and low-accuracy (ΔPTS > ± 2°) cohorts. Factors associated with inaccurate PTS reconstruction were evaluated in univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Only 40.7% of cases achieved PTS reconstruction within ± 2° of the planned target, and 72.2% of cases exhibited a postoperative PTS lower than planned. Univariate analysis identified older age, use of Chunli prosthesis, and Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) Type III phenotype as significant factors. Multivariate analysis confirmed CPAK Type III as an independent risk factor for inaccurate PTS reconstruction (OR = 2.7, 95% CI: 1.056-6.901, P = 0.038). The accuracy of PTS reconstruction in RA-TKA was suboptimal in this cohort, with a prevalent tendency toward under-correction. The CPAK Type III phenotype was identified as an independent risk factor for sagittal inaccuracy, warranting phenotype-specific consideration in preoperative planning and heightened intraoperative vigilance. Based on our clinical experience, compensatory strategies such as adjusting the planned PTS according to individual patient anatomy are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42329517What 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.