ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
What are the age-related factors linked to aseptic revisions in constrained and unconstrained TKA as well as UKA? A register-based study from the German arthroplasty registry (EPRD).
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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.
- Survivorship analysis of laminectomy with or without fusion for spinal stenosis or degenerative spondylolisthesis: a national retrospective cohort study.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Revision from unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: An analysis of 118 cases at midterm follow-up.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Younger age doubles medium-term revision risk after total knee arthroplasty: A nationwide multicenter cohort of 5980 knees from the French SCORE I registry.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic burden of septic re-revision surgeries for periprosthetic joint infections in Europe - a comprehensive analysis of re-revision costs.Journal of bone and joint infection · 2026Article
- Revision of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Not as uncomplicated as one thought? Analysis of survival and re-revisions from a single centre.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe implantation rate of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) is continuously growing. Aseptic problems are a major cause of revision. The aim of the following study was to determinate the incidence of aseptic revisions in primary knee arthroplasty as well as aseptic revision rates and influencing factors according to the patients' age and type of procedure.
methodsData collection was performed using the German Arthroplasty Registry. Influencing factors were analyzed according to the patients' age and type of procedure. Risk factors were calculated using multiple Log-rank test with the Holm's method. Incidence and comparison of aseptic revisions according to the patients' age and type of procedure were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier-estimates. Cox regression was applied to calculate the hazard ratio.
resultsOverall, 300,998 knee arthroplasties with 254,144 (84.4%) unconstrained TKA, 9,993 (3.3%) constrained TKA and 36,861 (12.3%) unicondylar knee arthroplasties (UKA) were analyzed. Patients younger than 65 years suffered a significantly higher aseptic revision rate than older patients (p < 0.0001). After one year, a revision rate of 1.1% was recorded for patients 65-74 years, 1.6% for patients under 65 years, and 1.3% for patients beyond 74 years. After seven years, patients younger than 65 years sustained in 5.0%, patients 65-74 years in 2.9% and patients beyond 74 years in 2.4% revision. In unconstrained TKA, an increased Elixhauser-score (HR = 1,75; HR = 1,54; HR = 1,7; p < 0,001) was a risk factor regardless the age. A TKA volume of 101-250 regardless the age (HR = 0,66; HR = 0,69; HR = 0,79) and > 250 under 75 years (< 65: HR = 0,72; 65-74: HR = 0,78; p = 0,001) were protective for aseptic revision. In UKA, male gender (HR = 0,81; HR = 0,72; HR = 0,57; p < 0,001), a UKA volume ≥ 51 for patients under 75 years (< 65: HR = 0,62; 65-74: HR = 0,59; p = 0,003) as well as cemented UKA for patients younger than 75 years (< 65: HR = 0,37; 65-74: HR = 0,37; p < 0,001) were detected as preventive factors.
conclusionA significant increased rate of aseptic revisions was reported for patients younger than 65 years compared to older patients. An increased Elixhauser score was a risk factor, whereas male and a high volume of performed UKA or TKA could be identified as preventive factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, 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.