ArticleScientific reports2025
Intraoperative performance and influencing factors in computer-assisted total shoulder arthroplasty: a large-scale analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The adoption of guidance technologies in total joint arthroplasty has expanded greatly in recent decades. This study aims to retrospectively evaluate the intra-operative performance of computer-assisted navigation (CAN) total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) over years, analyzing temporal performance evolution and influencing factors. Over 40,000 cases utilizing a single CAN system (Exactech GPS) across an 8-year span were analyzed. We investigated the registration and navigation phases for anatomic (aTSA) and reverse (rTSA) procedures, focusing on factors influencing performance and temporal evolution. Data were stratified by surgeon volume, native anatomy, implant type, and procedural workflow. Key findings include: (1) Navigation times were longer for rTSA (mean 15:42 min) compared to aTSA (mean 10:01 min). (2) Glenoid retroversion > 20° and inferior inclination increased both registration and navigation durations for aTSA and rTSA. (3) Augmented implants extended navigation time for aTSA but not rTSA. (4) Surgeon experience significantly influenced performance; high-volume surgeons demonstrated markedly faster times, with a mean navigation time reduction of up to 7:16 min (aTSA) and 13:52 min (rTSA) compared to low-volume counterparts. (5) Registration time decreased over the years for all surgeon profiles, indicating system learning curves and increasing user familiarity. Additionally, repeated registration prolonged both registration and navigation phases, suggesting an impact on operator confidence or tracker visibility issues. Navigation performance trends over the years showed initial increases for aTSA due to added navigation steps but subsequent reductions for high- and medium-volume surgeons, underscoring the evolving efficiency of system use. The study highlights key factors influencing CAN efficiency and supports its potential to improve surgical accuracy and reduce variability, even among low-volume surgeons. This large-scale analysis underscores the utility of CAN in optimizing TSA workflows while identifying areas for potential improvement, particularly for complex anatomical cases.
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.