Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Higher Total Knee Arthroplasty Revision Rates Among United States Blacks Than Whites: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Reportedly 2% to 5.7% of total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) require revision within 5 years. The purpose of this study was to determine whether blacks are at higher risk of TKA revision than whites in the United States.

METHODS: We performed a systematic review of English-language articles published from 2000 to 2015. Study inclusion criteria were (1) performance of the study in the United States, (2) TKA as the primary procedure studied, (3) a follow-up period at least 2 years, (4) reporting of revision rates, and (5) analysis of patient race as an independent predictor of revision. We then performed a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate a pooled hazard ratio for TKA revision in blacks compared with whites.

RESULTS: A total of 4,286 studies were identified and screened by title; 106, by abstract; and 24, by full text. Six studies met the inclusion criteria. Only 4 of the 6 studies could undergo meta-analysis because of overlapping study populations in 3 of them. The meta-analysis represented 451,960 patients who underwent TKA, of whom 28,772 (6.4%) were black. Of the total, 31,568 patients (7.0%) underwent revision surgery. The risk of revision TKA was significantly higher among blacks than whites (pooled hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.20 to 1.58; p < 0.001). Analysis of the 3 studies with overlapping study populations demonstrated discordant results as a result of adjustment compared with non-adjustment for insurance eligibility, a surrogate for socioeconomic status.

CONCLUSIONS: Blacks in the United States are at higher risk of revision TKA than whites. Socioeconomic status contributed to revision risk and is an important confounder in analyses of race.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app