ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Clinical and radiographic outcomes of ROSA robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective comparison of anatomic (persona) versus symmetric (vanguard) implant designs.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whether an anatomic or a symmetric implant performs better when both are implanted on the same robotic platform remains unclear. We therefore compared short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of the anatomic Persona and the symmetric Vanguard designs in ROSA robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Sixty-four consecutive patients (33 Vanguard, 31 Persona), all receiving a posterior-stabilized bearing, were reviewed retrospectively at a single center with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Outcome measures were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Score (KSS), range of motion (ROM) assessed preoperatively and postoperatively, planned and achieved femoral (FC) and tibial (TC) component angles measured by ROSA before resection and at cut validation, hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment with a >3° outlier threshold, and operative time. OKS and KSS improved significantly from baseline in both groups (all p < 0.001), and the groups did not differ at 12 months (OKS p = 0.080; KSS p = 0.100). Preoperative ROM was comparable (flexion p = 0.81; extension deficit p = 0.73). Flexion was greater in the Persona group (122.2 ± 9.1° vs. 115.2 ± 7.7°; p < 0.001; d = 0.83) and the extension deficit smaller (6.2 ± 3.1° vs. 8.7 ± 2.6°; p = 0.001; d = 0.90). Postoperative HKA was similar (2.80 ± 0.59° vs. 2.65 ± 0.64°; p = 0.245); one Vanguard patient exceeded the 3° threshold, and no Persona patient did. Of the achieved component angles, FC coronal flexion (p = 0.028) and TC coronal varus (p = 0.018) differed between groups. With both implants, ROSA-assisted TKA achieved equivalent HKA alignment within the range reported for the platform and excellent, comparable patient-reported outcomes. Small implant-specific differences remained in the achieved component angles. The Persona design was also associated with a range-of-motion advantage with large effect sizes, a finding specific to this retrospective cohort. These early findings should be tested in larger randomized trials with longer follow-up. Level of Evidence. III (retrospective cohort study).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42503571What 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.