Outcomes following Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Who Have Paget's Disease of Bone: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients who have Paget's Disease more frequently require total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) than matched controls. However, controversy remains regarding their outcome. We aimed to evaluate the literature regarding outcomes following THA and TKA in patients who have Paget's Disease. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for all articles evaluating outcomes following THA and TKA in patients who have Paget's Disease. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: A total of 19 articles (published between 1976 and 2022) were included, comprising 58,695 patients (48,766 controls and 10,018 patients who have Pagets Disease), from 209 potentially relevant titles. Patients with Paget's Disease have a pooled mortality of 32.5% at a mean of 7.8 years (range, 0.1 to 20) following THA and 31.0% at a mean of 8.5 years (range, 2 to 20) following TKA, with a pooled revision rate of 4.4% at 7.2 years (range, 0 to 20) following THA and 2.2% at 7.4 years (range, 2 to 20) following TKA. Renal and respiratory complications, as well as heterotopic ossification and surgical-site infection were the most common post-operative complications. CONCLUSION: There is marked heterogeneity in outcome reporting of studies assessing arthroplasty in patients who have Paget's Disease, with studies of low to moderate quality. Patients with Paget's Disease undergoing THA and TKA appear to have similar implant longevity as their unaffected counterparts. However, they appear to have an increased risk of medical and surgical complications and may have a higher mortality risk from their procedure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".