ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Characteristics of Patients Undergoing Revision Thumb CMC Arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 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
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to describe the demographic and operative characteristics of patients undergoing revision thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) arthroplasty and to characterize technique transitions from primary to revision surgery. Methods: A retrospective review of revision thumb CMC arthroplasty cases was performed within a single health system from August 2015 to August 2025. Cases were identified by querying Current Procedural Terminology code 25447 and screening operative notes for revision-related terminology. For each case, primary and revision operative details were extracted, including reconstruction technique, interposition material, implant(s) used, and trapezium and/or trapezoid excision. Demographics, laterality, dominant hand, smoking status, and diabetes mellitus were recorded. Results: Forty-two patients who underwent 54 ipsilateral revision thumb CMC arthroplasties were included. The cohort was predominantly women (79%) with a mean age at revision surgery of 62.9 ± 8.6. The median time from primary arthroplasty to first revision was 19 months (interquartile range, 10.9-43.2) with no difference by primary technique. Thirty-five patients (83%) underwent a single revision, six (14%) required two revisions, and one patient underwent seven revisions. The most common primary reconstruction techniques were flexor carpi radialis ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (38%) and abductor pollicis longus suspensionplasty (33%), while suture-button suspensionplasty was used in only two cases (5%). Suture-button suspensionplasty was the most frequently performed revision technique (33%) followed by abductor pollicis longus suspensionplasty (19%). Approximately 95.2% (40/42) underwent a change in technique at revision. Partial trapezoid excision was performed in 4 of 42 (10%) primary procedures, and trapezoidectomy was performed in 12 of 54 (22%) revision procedures (11 partial, 1 complete). Conclusions: Ninety-five percent of patients underwent a change in reconstruction technique at revision, and no single primary technique was immune to failure. Trapezoid excision was performed more than twice as often at revision, highlighting the role of adjacent joint pathology in the revision setting. Type of study/level of evidence: Retrospective review IV.
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.