ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2024
Patient mortality after total hip arthroplasty revision surgery.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cemented implantation of a dual mobility cup in an existing acetabular cup to prevent recurrent dislocation after total hip replacement.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Long-term implant survival, functional, and radiological assessment of cemented stem in revision hip arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Trends and Insights in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis.Hip & pelvis · 2025Article
- 30-day Mortality Following Revision of Hip Arthroplasty, A Cohort Study Based on the Swedish Perioperative Registry 2017-2022.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- [Factors associated with physical dependency in adults with hip fracture].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Complications following revision total hip arthroplasty can cause significant morbidity and have a high mortality rate. Patient age and American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system score are important determinants of mortality following revision hip arthroplasty. There is a paucity of high-quality evidence assessing the risk of mortality following revision hip arthroplasty stratified by indications of surgery. The aim of this study is to compare survival of patients undergoing revision THA for different indications. Methods: This retrospective case series reviewed the mortality rate following revision hip surgery performed by a single surgeon between 2009 and 2016 with a minimum 2 year follow up. Kaplan Meir analysis was performed using mortality as the end point. Log rank testing was used to determine if the indication for surgery conferred a difference in survival. Results: One hundred and ninety-eight consecutive cases were done using a tapered modular uncemented stem in 183 patients and were followed up for a mean period of 51.8 months (range, 24-121). Sixty patients died (67 % survivorship) during the follow up period with a 5-year survival rate of 78 %. Revision surgery performed for aseptic loosening had the best survival and hemiarthroplasty had the worst and differences in survival were statistically significant (P = 0.000002). Conclusion: The indication for revision surgery is an important criterion which must be given weightage along with age, functional status of patient and ASA physical status score while planning revision surgery and counselling patients.
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.