ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Virtual reality and digital shoulder surgery].
Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital technologies are increasingly expanding the scope of shoulder surgery. In shoulder arthroplasty, CT-based three-dimensional (3D-) planning has become established for assessing glenoid morphology, selecting implants, and virtually positioning components. Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) and computer-assisted navigation aim to translate preoperative planning into the operating room with greater precision. Virtual reality (VR) currently plays its most relevant role in shoulder surgical education and simulation. Augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR) may enable intraoperative visualization of planning data and telemedical supervision, however, their intraoperative application should still be considered experimental. Despite promising technological advances, evidence demonstrating long-term clinical benefit, reduced revision rates, or cost-effectiveness remains limited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42545339What 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.