Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Cementless versus cemented fixation in robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Created on 11 Sep 2026

Authors

Xiyi Lu, Jianxin Rui, Xi Wang, Xiaochun Deng, Huiru Dai, Wenrui Huang

Published in

Journal of robotic surgery. Volume 20. Issue 1. Sep 10, 2026. Epub Sep 10, 2026.

Abstract

Robotic assistance can improve the reproducibility of bone preparation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but whether this translates into different outcomes for cementless and cemented fixation is uncertain. PubMed, Embase.com, Web of Science Core Collection and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 29 July 2026 for comparative studies of cementless versus cemented primary robotic-assisted TKA. The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261446055). Random-effects models used restricted maximum likelihood estimation and Hartung-Knapp adjustment. Risk of bias and certainty were assessed using ROBINS-I and GRADE, respectively. Ten studies represented by 11 reports were included. In three-study syntheses, the pooled risk ratio (RR) was 0.63 for mid-term all-cause revision (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09 to 4.53; I²=0%) and 1.03 for manipulation under anaesthesia (95% CI 0.09 to 11.74; I²=31.6%). The pooled estimate suggested a potential reduction in operative time in selected settings (mean difference [MD] -12.91 min, 95% CI -36.38 to 10.55; I²=94.4%), but it was imprecise and highly heterogeneous. The length-of-stay estimate was imprecise (MD -0.24 days, 95% CI -3.67 to 3.19; I²=0%). Adjusted registry and institutional estimates were directionally mixed and were kept separate from crude risks. Certainty was very low for every pooled outcome. Available observational evidence is insufficient to favour either fixation strategy for survival or stiffness outcomes after robotic-assisted TKA. Any potential reduction in operative time appears setting dependent and remains uncertain. PROSPERO registration: CRD420261446055.

PMID:
42720876
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 11 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 7
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement