ArticleArthroplasty today2023
Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Implant Revision Risk to 5 Years From a State-wide Arthroplasty Registry in Michigan.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of Cementless Hip Arthroplasty Stem Types Based on Consolidated Large Registry Data.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Recognition and Recurrence of Aneurysmal Bone Cyst Secondary to Giant Cell Tumor: A Case Series and Review Of The Literature.The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2025Review
- Radiographic Performance of a Novel Femoral Stem Design.The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2025Article
- Clan Gatherings.Arthroplasty today · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Information on the revision risk of implants is useful for improving the quality of care for elective hip and knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to report on the revision risk of implants using a state-wide registry in the United States. Methods: The Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative systematically collects data on elective primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty cases in Michigan. It contained data on 139,970 hip and 245,499 knee arthroplasty cases from February 15, 2012, to December 31, 2021. Kaplan-Meier estimates of revision risk were computed using time to first revision as the dependent variable, and the results were computed and expressed as the cumulative percent revision (CPR). CPR estimates were computed for all implants having at least 500 cases in the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative dataset. Results: At 5-years postoperatively, elective primary conventional total hip arthroplasty implant stem/cup combinations had CPR values from 0.95% (0.39%-2.30%, 95% confidence intervals [CI]) to 5.77% (4.22%-7.85%, 95% CI), and elective primary total knee arthroplasty CPR ranged from 1.10% (0.64%-1.89%, 95% CI) to 12.52% (8.37%-18.50%, 95% CI). Unicondylar knee arthroplasty CPR at 5-years went from 4.23% (3.54%-5.06%, 95% CI) to 7.13% (6.20%-8.20%, 95% CI). Conclusions: The wide variation in CPR points to the need for surgeons to choose implants wisely to improve quality of care.
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.