ArticleJB & JS open access
Two-Year Revision Rates in Total Ankle Replacement Versus Ankle Arthrodesis: A Population-Based Propensity-Score-Matched Comparison from New York State and California.
Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- International Publication Trends of Studies Comparing Total Ankle Arthroplasty and Ankle Arthrodesis: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Outcomes and associated factors of revision procedures after failed total ankle arthroplasty: a comparative cohort analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Five decades of total ankle replacement: from early failures to fourth-generation innovations and future priorities.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Review
- Osteoporosis is not associated with increased reoperation or fracture risk three years after total ankle arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025Article
- The Burden of Revision Total Ankle Replacement Has Increased From 2010 to 2020.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2023Article
- [Postprimary early elective total arthroplasty in severe ankle fractures].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
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
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between total ankle replacement (TAR) and ankle arthrodesis (AA) for ankle osteoarthritis using real-world data. Methods: We used longitudinal claims data from New York State from October 2015 to December 2018, and from California from October 2015 to December 2017. The primary outcome was revision. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital complications and below-the-knee amputation. Propensity-score matching adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics. To determine predictors of the main outcome, each group was analyzed using multivariable Cox regressions. Results: There were 1,477 TAR procedures (50.2%) and 1,468 AA procedures (49.8%). Patients undergoing TAR were less likely to belong to a minority group and had fewer comorbidities compared with those undergoing AA. Crude analyses indicated that the TAR group had a lower risk of revision (5.4% versus 9.1%), in-hospital complications (<1% versus 1.8%), and below-the-knee amputation (<1% versus 4.9%) (p < 0.001 for all). However, in the propensity-score-matched analysis, the risk of revision was no longer significantly lower (TAR, 5.6% versus AA, 7.6%; p = 0.16). In the multivariable analyses, older age was predictive of a lower risk of revision after TAR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.93 to 1.00]), but age was not predictive of revision after AA (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.97 to 1.01]). Female patients were less likely to undergo revision after AA (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.96]), but sex was not predictive of revision after TAR (HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.51 to 1.60]). Conclusions: The 2-year adjusted revision risk was 5.6% after TAR and 7.6% after AA. This difference did not reach significance. Older age was a predictor of lower revision risk after TAR. Men had a higher risk of revision than women after AA. The number of TAR procedures has now caught up with the number of AA procedures. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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.