Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37395623›Full record

ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2023

Can Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Surgeons Help Address the Osteoporosis Epidemic?

Amil R Agarwal, Alisa Malyavko, Alex Gu, Andrew B Harris, Sandesh Rao, Robert Sterling, Gregory J Golladay, Savyasachi C Thakkar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Improving Total Joint Outcomes: A Survey of Surgeon Implementation of Perioperative Optimization Protocols.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
  3. The growing burden of periprosthetic fractures after total hip arthroplasty: identifying overall trends and at-risk groups.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  4. Trends in screening and treatment of osteoporosis after periprosthetic fractures from 2010 to 2020.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Amil R AgarwalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0480-9515
Alisa MalyavkoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA.
Alex GuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA.
Andrew B HarrisDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sandesh RaoWashington Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Robert SterlingDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA.
Gregory J GolladayDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
Savyasachi C ThakkarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOsteoporosis is a known, modifiable risk factor for lower extremity periprosthetic fractures. Unfortunately, a high percentage of patients at risk of osteoporosis who undergo THA or TKA do not receive routine screening and treatment for osteoporosis, but there is insufficient information determining the proportion of patients undergoing THA and TKA who should be screened and their implant-related complications. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What proportion of patients in a large database who underwent THA or TKA met the criteria for osteoporosis screening? (2) What proportion of these patients received a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) study before arthroplasty? (3) What was the 5-year cumulative incidence of fragility fracture or periprosthetic fracture after arthroplasty of those at high risk compared with those at low risk of osteoporosis?

methodsBetween January 2010 and October 2021, 710,097 and 1,353,218 patients who underwent THA and TKA, respectively, were captured in the Mariner dataset of the PearlDiver database. We used this dataset because it longitudinally tracks patients across a variety of insurance providers throughout the United States to provide generalizable data. Patients at least 50 years old with at least 2 years of follow-up were included, and patients with a diagnosis of malignancy and fracture-indicated total joint arthroplasty were excluded. Based on this initial criterion, 60% (425,005) of THAs and 66% (897,664) of TKAs were eligible. A further 11% (44,739) of THAs and 11% (102,463) of TKAs were excluded because of a prior diagnosis of or treatment for osteoporosis, leaving 54% (380,266) of THAs and 59% (795,201) of TKAs for analysis. Patients at high risk of osteoporosis were filtered using demographic and comorbidity information provided by the database and defined by national guidelines. The proportion of patients at high risk of osteoporosis who underwent osteoporosis screening via DEXA scan within 3 years was observed, and the 5-year cumulative incidence of periprosthetic fractures and fragility fracture was compared between the high-risk and low-risk cohorts.

resultsIn total, 53% (201,450) and 55% (439,982) of patients who underwent THA and TKA, respectively, were considered at high risk of osteoporosis. Of these patients, 12% (24,898 of 201,450) and 13% (57,022 of 439,982) of patients who underwent THA and TKA, respectively, received a preoperative DEXA scan. Within 5 years, patients at high risk of osteoporosis undergoing THA and TKA had a higher cumulative incidence of fragility fractures (THA: HR 2.1 [95% CI 1.9 to 2.2]; TKA: HR 1.8 [95% CI 1.7 to 1.9]) and periprosthetic fractures (THA: HR 1.7 [95% CI 1.5 to 1.8]; TKA: HR 1.6 [95% CI 1.4 to 1.7]) than those at low risk (p < 0.001 for all).

conclusionWe attribute the higher rates of fragility and periprosthetic fractures in those at high risk compared with those at low risk to an occult diagnosis of osteoporosis. Hip and knee arthroplasty surgeons can help reduce the incidence and burden of these osteoporosis-related complications by initiating screening and subsequently referring patients to bone health specialists for treatment. Future studies might investigate the proportion of osteoporosis in patients at high risk of having the condition, develop and evaluate practical bone health screening and treatment algorithms for hip and knee arthroplasty surgeons, and observe the cost-effectiveness of implementing these algorithms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeOsteoporosisPeriprosthetic FracturesHumansMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID37395623
PMCPMC10427059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.