Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24285406›Full record

ArticleArthritis care & research2014

Risk factors for early revision after total hip arthroplasty.

Christopher J Dy, Kevin J Bozic, Ting Jung Pan, Timothy M Wright, Douglas E Padgett, Stephen Lyman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthritis care & research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The risk of revision surgery after trainee-led primary total hip replacement.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christopher J DyHospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Kevin J Bozic
Ting Jung Pan
Timothy M Wright
Douglas E Padgett
Stephen Lyman
Hospital for Special Surgery · US

Funding

The Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics *U18HS016075 · AHRQ · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI MUSHLIN, ALVIN MUSHLIN · 2006 to 2010
$4.0M
ORTHOPAEDIC RESEARCH TRAININGT32AR007281 · NIAMS · HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY · PI MAHER, SUZANNE A., VAN DER MEULEN, MARJOLEIN C · 1986 to 2018
$1.8M
Referral Patterns and Risk of Early Revision after Primary Total Joint ArthroplasRC1AR058280 · NIAMS · HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY · PI LYMAN, STEPHEN L · 2009 to 2010
$715k
AHRQ HHS U18 HS016075AHRQ HHS U18-HS16075NIAMS NIH HHS RC1 AR058280NIAMS NIH HHS RC1-AR-058280-01NIAMS NIH HHS T32 AR007281NIAMS NIH HHS T32 AR-07281
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRevision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with increased cost, morbidity, and technical challenge compared to primary THA. A better understanding of the risk factors for early revision is needed to inform strategies to optimize patient outcomes.

methodsA total of 207,256 patients who underwent primary THA between 1997-2005 in California and New York were identified from statewide databases. Unique patient identifiers were used to identify early revision THA (<10 years from index procedure). Patient characteristics (demographics, comorbidities, insurance type, and preoperative diagnosis), community characteristics (education level, poverty, and population density), and hospital characteristics (annual THA volume, bed size, and teaching status) were evaluated using multivariable regression to determine risk factors for early revision.

resultsThe probabilities of undergoing early aseptic revision and early septic revision were 4% and <1% at 5 years, respectively. Women were 29% less likely than men to undergo early septic revision (P < 0.001). Patients with Medicaid and Medicare were 91% and 24%, respectively, more likely to undergo early septic revision than privately insured patients (P = 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively). Hospitals performing <200 THAs annually had a 34% increased risk of early aseptic revision compared to hospitals performing >400 THAs annually (P < 0.001).

conclusionA number of identifiable factors, including younger age, Medicaid, and low hospital volume, increase the risk of undergoing early revision THA. Patient-level characteristics distinctly affect the risk of revision within 10 years, particularly if due to infection. Our findings reinforce the need for continued investigation of the predictors of early failure following THA.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsArthroplasty, Replacement, HipCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReoperationRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24285406
PMCPMC4269321
OpenAlexW1557421614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.