ArticleFoot & ankle orthopaedics2023
The Burden of Revision Total Ankle Replacement Has Increased From 2010 to 2020.
Article in Foot & ankle orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Fate of revision total ankle arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of 999 cases.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using the INVISION Modular Implant System: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Growing Utilization of Total Spine MRI Relative to Localized Spine MRI for Patients Presenting Through Emergency Departments Over the Past Decade.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Background: Total ankle replacement (TAR) surgery has increased in recent decades. The aim of this study was to investigate the evolving burden of revision surgery and risk factors and timing of revision or explant. Methods: Using the 2010 to 2020 PearlDiver M151Ortho data set, this retrospective cohort study identified primary TAR, TAR revision, and TAR explant patients via Results: A total of 10 531 primary, 1218 revision, and 1735 explant TARs were identified. After normalization, TAR utilization increased by 284% from 2010 to 2020, annual TAR revisions rose 28%, and annual TAR explants decreased 65%. Independent predictors of revision TAR were younger age (odds ratio [OR] 1.29 per decade decrease) and higher ECI (OR 1.23 per 2-point increase). Independent predictors of explant included younger age (OR 1.80 per decade decrease), female sex (OR 1.17), and higher ECI (OR 1.35 per 2-point increase). The 10-year implant survival rate was 91.8%, of which 73% of revisions and 83% of explants occurred in the first 3 years following index TAR. Conclusion: TAR utilization has grown substantially over the past decade, with minimal increases in the annual rate of revision surgery with respect to index procedures performed. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.
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.