ArticleActa orthopaedica2021
Variation and trends in reasons for knee replacement revision: a multi-registry study of revision burden.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Septic complications are on the rise and aseptic loosening has decreased in total joint arthroplasty: an updated complication based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- The effect of patient and prosthesis factors on revision rates after total knee replacement using a multi-registry meta-analytic approach.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Pooled it
- New Zealand Joint Registry Surgeon-Level Feedback: The Influence of Reporting Timeframe on Distribution of Reasons for Revision Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- The projected economic burden and complications of revision hip and knee arthroplasties: Insights from national registry studies.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Review
- Comparison of medium- and long-term total knee arthroplasty follow-up with or without tourniquet.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Comparison of surgical treatments for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections using the desirability of outcome ranking in a prospective multicentre study.Journal of bone and joint infection · 2025Article
- Is Wear Still a Concern in Total Knee Arthroplasty With Contemporary Conventional and Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Tibial Inserts in the mid- to Long-Term?Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Genetically predicted effects of 10 sleep phenotypes on revision of knee arthroplasty: a mendelian randomization study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Clinical outcomes and radiolucent line analysis in cementless mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective multicentre study in Japan.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Prevalence, risk factors, microbiological results and clinical outcome in unexpected positive intraoperative cultures in unclear and presumed aseptic hip and knee revision arthroplasties - A ten-year retrospective analysis with a minimum follow up of 2 years.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2024Article
- Multifunctional Hybrid Material for Endoprosthetic Implants Based on Alumina-Toughened Zirconia Ceramics and Additively Manufactured TiNbTa Alloys.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Temporal trends in revision rate due to knee periprosthetic joint infection: a study of 115,120 cases from the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register.Acta orthopaedica · 2023Article
- The indication for aseptic revision TKA does not influence 1-year outcomes: an analysis of 178 full TKA revisions from a prospective institutional registry.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Article
- Evolving etiologies and rates of revision total knee arthroplasty: a 10-year institutional report.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2022Article
- Impact of patient and prosthesis characteristics on common reasons for total knee replacement revision: a registry study of 36,626 revision cases from Australia, Sweden, and USA.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Article
- Tibiofemoral dynamic stressed gap laxities correlate with compartment load measurements in robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty.Bone & joint open · 2021Article
- Which Total Knee Arthroplasty Revisions Do Not Improve Patient-Reported Outcomes?JB & JS open accessArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose - Studies describing time-related change in reasons for knee replacement revision have been limited to single regions or institutions, commonly analyze only 1st revisions, and may not reflect true caseloads or findings from other areas. We used revision procedure data from 3 arthroplasty registries to determine trends and differences in knee replacement revision diagnoses.Patients and methods - We obtained aggregated data for 78,151 revision knee replacement procedures recorded by the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (SKAR), the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), and the Kaiser Permanente Joint Replacement Registry (KPJRR) for the period 2003-2017. Equivalent diagnosis groups were created. We calculated the annual proportions of the most common reasons for revision.Results - Infection, loosening, and instability were among the 5 most common reasons for revision but magnitude and ranking varied between registries. Over time there were increases in proportions of revisions for infection and decreases in revisions for wear. There were inconsistent proportions and trends for the other reasons for revision. The incidence of revision for infection showed a uniform increase.Interpretation - Despite some differences in terminology, comparison of registry-recorded revision diagnoses is possible, but defining a single reason for revision is not always clear-cut. There were common increases in revision for infection and decreases in revision for wear, but variable changes in other categories. This may reflect regional practice differences and therefore generalizability of studies regarding reasons for revision is unwise.
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.