ReviewArthroplasty (London, England)2026
Asia-Pacific expert consensus on robotic-assisted hip and knee arthroplasty.
Review 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
42 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic-assisted total joint arthroplasty (rTJA) has witnessed rapid adoption across the Asia-Pacific region. However, practice heterogeneity and conflicting evidence regarding its clinical value necessitate standardized guidance. Therefore, this expert consensus aims to establish consensus-based recommendations to guide and standardize the clinical application of rTJA.
methodsThe Arthroplasty Society in Asia (ASIA) convened a panel of 45 experts. A modified Delphi technique was employed across three rounds. A systematic literature review informed the generation of consensus statements, which were finalized through anonymous voting. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement.
resultsThe panel reached consensus on 18 critical clinical questions spanning general principles, total hip arthroplasty, and total knee arthroplasty. Key consensus points include: (1) rTJA demonstrates superior accuracy in implant positioning and alignment restoration compared to manual techniques (98%); (2) current evidence does not yet support a definitive superiority in long-term survivorship or PROMs (77%); (3) robotic platforms are enabling technologies that make personalized alignment philosophies technically reproducible (100%); and (4) soft-tissue balancing should take precedence over rigid mechanical alignment targets in rTKA when conflicts arise(91%).
conclusionThis consensus statement provides a comprehensive framework for the application of robotic technology in hip and knee arthroplasty, emphasizing safety, precision, and the need for rigorous training.
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.