MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392164298 · doi:10.1111/os.14008

Safety and Effectiveness of Robotic‐Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

2024· article· en· W4392164298 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWest China Hospital, Sichuan UniversitySichuan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineTotal knee arthroplastyArthroplastySurgeryRobotic armComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective We investigated the advantages of robotic arm‐assisted total knee arthroplasty (raTKA) over conventional manual TKA (cmTKA) by comprehensively comparing patients who received raTKA and cmTKA in terms of postoperative pain, function, imaging assessment, and trauma to the body. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of raTKA in patients using the YUANHUA‐TKA system. Methods In a prospective, randomized single‐blind trial, 60 patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA from October 2020 to December 2020 were randomly assigned to either raTKA or cmTKA. Clinical evaluation, including the time of osteotomy and prosthesis model testing, the total operation time, the visual analogue scale at rest, VAS in motion, opioid consumption, white blood cell count, neutrophil ratio, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C‐reactive protein (CRP), passive and active range of motion (pROM, aROM), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC [stiffness, pain, and function]) score, gait analysis, keen society score (KSS), adverse events, and blood loss were collected by the project nurse, as well as the imaging evaluation, including the lateral tibia component angle (LTC), frontal femoral component angle, frontal tibia component angle (FTC), lateral femoral component angl, and hip–knee–ankle angle (HKA). The student t ‐test (or the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test) and the χ 2 ‐test (or the Fisher exact test) were used to determine differences in categorical variables. Results No significant difference was found between the two groups in pain throughout the whole follow‐up period. On the third day postoperatively, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate in the cmTKA group was significantly higher ( p = 0.02), as well as the CRP ( p = 0.04). No significant difference was found in the WOMAC stiffnes score or pROM. However, the aROM and the flexion range when walking (FRW) were significantly better in the raTKA group throughout the trial ( p < 0.05). The KSS at the 1‐month follow‐up and the WOMAC function score at the 1‐year follow‐up were both significantly better in the raTKA group ( p < 0.05). The HKA and the LTC in the raTKA group closer to the ideal angle, and the difference between the groups was significant ( p < 0.05). The total operation time of the raTKA group was significantly longer ( p = 0.001). The intraoperative blood loss had no significant difference in the two groups. Conclusion Compared with cmTKA, raTKA with the YUANHUA robot not only avoids extra pain and trauma in patients but promises better functional recovery and improves the accuracy of the prosthesis position and axial alignment reconstruction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it