ReviewEFORT open reviews2019
Why does radial head arthroplasty fail today? A systematic review of recent literature.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07560657 (RHEVOLUTION Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
RHEVOLUTION Clinical Trial: Radial Head Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Acute Traumatic Elbow Instability, a Randomized Trial Comparing Two Implant Designs
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncementing the status quo: systematic review of a loose-fit, polished stem radial head prosthesis shows stable clinical results in complex elbow injuries with a concomitant radial head fracture.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- Silicone radial head prostheses revisited: do they have a role in today's practice? A systematic review of literature on clinical outcomes.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2023Pooled it
- Rise in radial head arthroplasty utilization in young patients: an analysis of the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample.JSES international · 2026Article
- Loose Fit Monobloc Versus Cemented Bipolar Radial Head Prosthesis in the Treatment of Radial Head Fractures: A Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Radiographic findings after radial head replacement.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Medium- to long-term results of press-fit radial head arthroplasty in acute fractures and post-traumatic conditions.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Hawkins Award 2025: clinical implications of radiological findings associated with radial head replacement. A long-term follow-up study.JSES international · 2026Article
- Radial head arthroplasty: A pillar of stability in complex elbow fractures.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Article
- Good outcomes of bipolar radial head arthroplasty for comminuted radial head fractures : a cohort study of 64 patients with an average 5.2-year follow-up.Bone & joint open · 2025Article
- Isolated MASON type-III radial head fractures: radial head arthroplasty or open reduction and internal fixation - clinical and radiological outcomes with five to fourteen years of follow up.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Early Callus as an Adverse Prognostic Sign Following Radial Head Replacement for Trauma.Cureus · 2024Article
- Revision of Failed Radial Head Arthroplasty.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Radial head arthroplasty diameter impact on elbow kinematics evaluated by dynamic radiostereometric analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Does stress shielding after radial head arthroplasty affect functional outcomes?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Article
- Proximal ulna morphology in various pediatric population age groups: proximal ulna dorsal angulation (PUDA) and olecranon tip-to-apex (TTA) distance.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2023Article
- Early aseptic loosening of a press-fit radial head prosthesis - A case series of 6 patients.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
- After failed radial head arthroplasty, what are the options? Risk factors and results of revisions in a multicenter study.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2023Article
- The comparative performance of radial head prostheses in patients younger than and older than 50 years: a systematic review.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2023Review
- Survivorship of anatomic press-fit short-stem radial head replacement with a pyrocarbon bearing.Shoulder & elbow · 2022Article
- RADIAL head arthroplasty: does ligaments repair influence outcomes? A minimum two years follow-up radiographic multi-center study.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the introduction of the radial head prosthesis (RHP) in 1941, many designs have been introduced. It is not clear whether prosthesis design parameters are related to early failure. The aim of this systematic review is to report on failure modes and to explore the association between implant design and early failure.A search was conducted to identify studies reporting on failed primary RHP. The results are clustered per type of RHP based on: material, fixation technique, modularity, and polarity. Chi-square tests are used to compare reasons for failure between the groups.Thirty-four articles are included involving 152 failed radial head arthroplasties (RHAs) in 152 patients. Eighteen different types of RHPs have been used.The most frequent reasons for revision surgery after RHA are (aseptic) loosening (30%), elbow stiffness (20%) and/or persisting pain (17%). Failure occurs after an average of 34 months (range, 0-348 months; median, 14 months).Press-fit prostheses fail at a higher ratio because of symptomatic loosening than intentionally loose-fit prostheses and prostheses that are fixed with an expandable stem (p < 0.01).Because of the many different types of RHP used to date and the limited numbers and evidence on early failure of RHA, the current data provide no evidence for a specific RHP design. Cite this article:
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.