ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Outcomes and associated factors of revision procedures after failed total ankle arthroplasty: a comparative cohort analysis.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAfter failed total ankle arthroplasty (TAA), revision arthrodesis (RAA) and revision arthroplasty (RTAA) are treatment options, but comparative outcome data remain limited. The aim of this study was to compare mid-term survival of RAA and RTAA after failed primary TAA and to explore clinical and radiographic factors associated with failure. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, 124 patients (RAA = 72, RTAA = 52) were reviewed after failed TAA between 2006 and 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression were used to assess survival, and decision tree models were used as exploratory tools to identify factors associated with failure.
resultsMean follow-up was 71.6 ± 42.7 months. Surgical failure occurred in 6.45% of patients, with no significant difference (RAA 6.9%, RTAA 5.8%). Five-year survival was slightly higher for RTAA (97% vs. 93%), although durability decreased beyond 87 months. Female sex, higher BMI, and younger age were associated with failure after RAA, whereas large periprosthetic cysts and elevated BMI were related to failure after RTAA.
conclusionsRAA and RTAA demonstrate comparable mid-term survival after failed TAA. Revision strategy selection should be individualized, considering bone stock, patient characteristics, and failure patterns. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.