Clinical Evidence
Published research demonstrates that robotic-assisted knee surgery with CORI technology delivers measurably better outcomes than conventional techniques—backed by rigorous clinical studies and real-world data.
Implant Survivorship
at 2 years post-surgery
Alignment Accuracy
within 1° of surgical plan
Faster Return to Sports
4.2 vs 10.5 months
Possible Discharge
with appropriate selection
Why Precision Matters
Conventional knee replacement is a successful intervention, but research shows significant room for improvement in patient outcomes.
of patients report some degree of limitation to their functional ability following conventional TKA
of patients are not satisfied with their conventional total knee replacement
of conventional UKA procedures result in alignment outliers beyond 2° of the planned position
The evidence is clear: implant positioning significantly affects outcomes. Even small deviations from optimal alignment can impact how natural your knee feels, how long the implant lasts, and your overall satisfaction. This is why robotic-assisted surgery—with its sub-millimeter precision—represents such an important advancement.
Evidence-Based Benefits
Clinical studies consistently demonstrate advantages of robotic-assisted surgery across multiple outcome measures.
Superior Implant Positioning
- Significantly lower mechanical axis deviation (p=0.019)
- Mean difference in planned vs achieved alignment: 0.2°
- 91% of procedures achieve alignment within 1° of plan
Source: Vaidya et al. 2020, Randomized Controlled Trial
Improved Joint Line Restoration
- Significantly improved joint line restoration (p<0.05)
- Lower revision rates due to malalignment
- Up to 60% of conventional procedures result in outliers beyond 2° planned alignment
Source: Multiple peer-reviewed studies
Better Clinical Outcomes
- Significantly higher KOOS-JR scores at 6 months (p=0.037)
- Significantly improved FJS-12 and OKS at 2 years (p≤0.05)
- Significantly better IKSS-Objective scores (p<0.05)
Source: Held et al. 2021, Popat et al. 2022
Faster Recovery
- 38% sooner hospital discharge (p=0.005)
- 13% earlier discharge from physiotherapy (p=0.02)
- >50% faster return to sports activities
Source: Shearman et al. 2021, Canetti et al. 2018
Reduced Blood Loss
- 23.7% less blood loss than conventional surgery (p<0.01)
- 83% relative risk reduction for blood transfusion
- Only 2% vs 12% of patients required transfusion
Source: Khan et al. 2021, Retrospective Analysis
Lower Revision Rates
- Significantly lower revision rate (4% vs 11%; p=0.014)
- 0% revisions due to malalignment with robotic-assisted
- 99.2% implant survivorship at 2 years
Source: Mergenthaler et al. 2020, Case Control Study
Implant Survivorship
Robotic-assisted surgery demonstrates excellent early survivorship rates, with significantly fewer revisions due to malalignment compared to conventional techniques.
2-Year Survivorship
Robotic-assisted UKA
Revisions Due to Malalignment
vs 86% in conventional surgery
Comparison with Registry Data
2-year survivorship rates for UKA procedures
Comprehensive Research
The clinical evidence for Smith+Nephew robotic-assisted surgery spans multiple countries, surgical centers, and peer-reviewed publications.
Published Studies
Accuracy Studies
Recovery Studies
Randomized Trials
Data sourced from Smith+Nephew Evidence Compendium, December 2021, and RI.KNEE Evidence in Focus, August 2023.
See the Evidence in Action
Find a hospital in Pakistan equipped with CORI technology and discuss whether robotic-assisted surgery is right for you.
Find a CORI Hospital