ArticleInternational orthopaedics2026
Robotic assistance reduces operative time variability in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a retrospective single-surgeon study.
Article in International orthopaedics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic assistance for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) improves the accuracy and consistency of implant positioning, but whether this reproducibility extends to the surgical workflow is unknown. This study sought to compare operative time variability between conventional and robotic-assisted rTSA using the Mako robotic system (Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed consecutive elective primary rTSAs performed by a single fellowship-trained shoulder surgeon. Operative time was defined as incision start to incision closure. The first 23 robotic-assisted cases using the Mako robotic system were designated the learning phase based on a prior internal operative time learning curve analysis and were excluded. Post-learning curve robotic-assisted cases were compared with conventional cases from the same period. The primary outcome was operative time variability, quantified using the standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation, and compared with the Brown-Forsythe test and the variance ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI). Native glenoid retroversion and RSA angle were compared as markers of case complexity.
resultsThirty-nine robotic-assisted cases were compared with 38 conventional cases. Robotic operative time was substantially less variable than conventional operative time (SD 9.9 vs. 19.7 min; coefficient of variation 13.3% vs. 25.0%; variance ratio 4.01; 95% CI, 2.09-7.69; Brown-Forsythe P < .001), while mean operative time was equivalent (74.2 vs. 78.8 min; P = .20). The groups did not differ in native glenoid retroversion (9.2° vs. 8.7°; P = .77) or RSA angle (14.3° vs. 15.1°; P = .57).
conclusionRobotic-assisted rTSA was associated with more consistent operative times than conventional rTSA, with no significant difference in mean operative time. These findings suggest that the value of robotic assistance in rTSA may extend beyond implant positioning to the reproducibility of surgical workflow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42839054What 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.