ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2026
The most influential articles in total elbow arthroplasty: bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most-cited articles.
Article in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The literature surrounding total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has evolved as advances in prosthetic design, surgical technique, and patient selection have shaped its modern role in elbow reconstructive surgery. We hope to identify and examine the characteristics of the 100 most-cited articles on TEA in the orthopedic literature. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Web of Science databases with the search term: "total" AND "elbow arthroplasty." Articles were included if the primary focus was on TEA. Studies addressing epicondylitis, elbow stiffness, or general elbow surgery without explicit reference to TEA were excluded. The top 100 most-cited articles were analyzed for publication year, total citations, citations per year, level of evidence, study design, authors, institutions, country of origin, and journal impact. Results: The top 100 most-cited TEA articles received a total of 8,225 citations, averaging 82 citations per article. Citations have steadily increased since 1990, with the most productive publication year being 2005. The most cited article, by Day et al, examined national trends in upper extremity arthroplasty and projected future growth in procedure volumes. The 3 most cited articles were each cited more than 250 times. The top journals were Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume (3,632 citations), Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (1,550 citations), and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-British Volume (753 citations). Dr. Bernard Morrey was the most prolific author with 35 publications and 3,125 citations, followed by Dr. Robert Adams. The United States led in publication volume (n = 58), specifically Mayo Clinic (n = 30). Most studies were level 4 evidence (n = 59). No significant correlation was found between level of evidence and total citations ( Conclusion: The Day et al study on national trends and projections in upper extremity arthroplasty is the most cited work in the TEA literature. The growing number of citations over time reflects TEA's rising clinical relevance and the evolving landscape of elbow reconstruction. Despite most articles being lower level of evidence, the citation impact surrounding TEA appears more closely tied to its clinical relevance than its methodology.
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.