ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026
Disparities in Revision Arthroplasty: A Scoping Review of Racial, Sex-Based, and Geographic Domains.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewRevision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are high-cost procedures that disproportionately burden patients and healthcare systems. While disparities in primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) are well documented, inequities specific to revision TJA remain less clearly characterized and are inconsistently interpreted. This scoping review synthesizes studies published from January 2019 onward to examine racial, sex-based, and geographic disparities in revision total hip or knee arthroplasty. RECENT
findingsTwenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Racial disparities were the most consistently documented, with multiple large database and registry studies demonstrating higher aseptic revision risk following primary TKA among Black patients compared with White patients. These disparities persisted after adjusting for patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics. In contrast, racial disparities in revision THA were less consistent. Sex-based differences in revision TJA were smaller in magnitude and more heterogeneous, often reflecting biologic and biomechanical variation rather than access-related inequities. Geographic disparities highlighted substantial regional variation in revision TJA utilization and the influence of community-level social determinants of health on revision TJA risk and access. Disparities in revision TJA are multifactorial and reflect the interaction of differential revision TJA risk, unequal access to revision TJA care, and cumulative exposure to social determinants of health across the arthroplasty care continuum. Advancing revision TJA equity will require integrating measures of revision TJA risk and revision TJA access, incorporating social vulnerability into risk stratification, and designing policy interventions that address structural determinants of surgical care.
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.