ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2024
Complications of periprosthetic fracture revision vs aseptic revision of total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are a challenging problem due to complex fracture patterns, poor bone quality, and a high-risk patient population. Treatment of both periprosthetic fractures and aseptic complications can include revision TKA. In this study, we compared systemic and orthopaedic complications following periprosthetic fracture associated revision TKA to aseptic revision TKA. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using data from the years 2010-2020 from a national administrative claims database. Billing codes were used to identify revision TKAs with a diagnosis of periprosthetic fracture or aseptic complications (loosening, dislocation, arthrofibrosis, osteolysis, or prosthetic wear) within one year prior to revision. Pertinent systemic complications and rates of repeat revision TKA, periprosthetic infection, and repeat fractures were compared between the two groups. Results: We identified 9891 periprosthetic fracture associated revision TKAs and 47,071 aseptic revision TKAs. Our study found higher rate of systemic complications including AKI, DVT, wound disruption, hematoma, and surgical site infections in periprosthetic fracture associated revision TKA compared to aseptic revision TKA. Furthermore, we found higher rates of repeat revision TKA, periprosthetic infections, and repeat periprosthetic fractures in fracture associated revision TKA group compared to aseptic revision group. Conclusions: Our work highlights the significant short- and long-term complications associated with periprosthetic fracture associated revision TKA. Future working comparing functional outcomes and optimal surgical techniques are needed.
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.