Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40486812›Full record

ReviewJSES international2025

Robotics in arthroplasty: how good are they?

Maxim Vanderstappen, Johannes H M van Ochten, Olivier Verborgt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JSES international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maxim VanderstappenOrthopaedic Center Antwerp (ORTHOCA), AZ Monica, Antwerp, Belgium.
Johannes H M van OchtenOrthopaedic Center Antwerp (ORTHOCA), AZ Monica, Antwerp, Belgium.
Olivier VerborgtOrthopaedic Center Antwerp (ORTHOCA), AZ Monica, Antwerp, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic systems have emerged as indispensable allies in the surgical arena, revolutionizing traditional practices and enhancing the capabilities of health-care professionals. Far removed from the autonomous robots depicted in science fiction, these robotic systems operate under the skilled guidance of surgeons, who control specialized instruments via intuitive consoles and often with the help of robotic product specialists. This symbiotic relationship between man and machine has propelled robotic surgery to the forefront of medical innovation, offering a plethora of benefits that transcends the limitations of conventional surgical techniques. In orthopedic surgery, robotic-assisted knee and hip arthroplasty has experienced rapid growth, and the next field of interest is, without a doubt, shoulder arthroplasty. Digitalization and the use of robotics in shoulder arthroplasty has drawn a lot of attention with the goal to improve the correction of joint deformities and component implantation, possibly leading to enhanced patient outcomes. This next evolution in surgical technology aims to make shoulder replacements more accurate and reproducible in both easy and challenging shoulders and usable by both low-volume and highly experienced surgeons. Nevertheless, robotic-assisted shoulder arthroplasty presents significant challenges related to cost, implant selection, training, and long-term efficacy. Addressing these challenges will require collaboration between surgeons, manufacturers, and regulatory bodies to ensure the safe and effective integration of robotic technology into orthopedic shoulder practice.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyFutureInnovationRoboticsShoulderTechnology

Identifiers

PMID40486812
PMCPMC12144964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.