Observational studyActa orthopaedica2022
Fast-track revision hip arthroplasty: a multicenter cohort study on 1,345 elective aseptic major component revision hip arthroplasties.
Observational study in Acta orthopaedica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06431906 (TRANSDERMAL FENTANYL AS A FORM OF REBOUND PAIN REDUCTION IN FAST TRACK PROGRAMME IN PRIMARY KNEE ARTHROPLASTY. Prospective Observational Non-inferiority Study Versus Morphine PCA.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
TRANSDERMAL FENTANYL AS A FORM OF REBOUND PAIN REDUCTION IN FAST TRACK PROGRAMME IN PRIMARY KNEE ARTHROPLASTY. Prospective Observational Non-inferiority Study Versus Morphine PCA.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The extent of first-time THA revision is not associated with patient-reported outcomes at 1-year follow-up: a study of 426 aseptic revisions.Acta orthopaedica · 2023Article
- The Top Three Burning Questions in Total Hip Arthroplasty.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeData on application of fasttrack/enhanced recovery protocols in revision hip arthroplasty (R-THA) surgery is scarce. We report length of stay (LOS), risk of LOS > 5 days, and readmission ≤ 90 days after revision hip arthroplasty in centers with a well-established fast-track protocol in both primary and revision procedures. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis is an observational cohort study from the Centre for Fast-track Hip and Knee Replacement and the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Consecutive elective aseptic major component revision hip arthroplasties from 6 dedicated fast-track centers from 2010 to 2018 were included.
results1,345 R-THAs were analyzed, including 23% total revisions, 52% acetabular component revisions, and 25% femoral component revisions. Mean age was 70 years (SD 12) and 61% were female. Median LOS was 3 days (interquartile range [IQR] 2-6), decreasing from median 6 (IQR 3-10) days in 2010 to 2 (IQR 1-4) days in 2018. The 90-day readmission rate was 20%, but showed a fluctuating and increasing trend from 13% in 2010 to 28% in 2018. Risk factors for LOS > 5 days and readmission were use of walking aid, preoperative hemoglobin ≤ 13 g/dL, pharmacological treated psychiatric disorder, age ≥ 80 years, age 70-79 years (only LOS > 5 days), cardiac disease (only LOS > 5 days), pulmonary disease (only readmission), BMI ≥ 35 (only LOS > 5 days) and ≥ 1 previous revision (only LOS > 5 days).
interpretationLOS decreased to median 2 days at the end of the study period, but the 90 days readmission risk remained high (> 20%). Several risk factors for postoperative complications were identified, suggesting that at-risk patients should be treated using an extended fast-track/enhanced recovery protocol focusing on preoperative optimization and postoperative monitoring as well as surgical techniques to reduce hip dislocations.
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.