Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics logoLink to Indian Journal of Orthopaedics
. 2021 Mar 10;55(5):1335–1347. doi: 10.1007/s43465-021-00390-w

Global Research Trends in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Bibliometric and Visualized Study

Shengjie Dong 1, Yu Zhao 2,3, Jiao Jiao Li 4,✉, Dan Xing 2,3,✉
PMCID: PMC8586134  PMID: 34824733

Abstract

Background

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a longstanding area of research interest in orthopedics due to its increasing global demand and associated technical challenges. The present study aims to analyze and present the current state of research and trends in this active field.

Methods

Articles on revision TKA published from inception to 2018 were retrieved from Web of Science. Bibliometric analysis was conducted using the metadata of the included articles. Visualized analysis was conducted using VOSviewer software to reveal global trends in revision TKA research, through analyses of bibliographic coupling, co-authorship, co-citation and co-occurrence.

Results

A total of 6027 articles were included. The number of publications and relative research interest in the field of revision TKA displayed strong upward growth over the time period examined. The USA had the highest number of citations for publications in this field, as well as the highest H-index. Studies in the field could be categorized into five clusters: prosthesis design, periprosthetic fracture, periprosthetic joint infection, risk factors for revision TKA, and survivorship of implants. Studies focused on infection and risk factors for revision TKA are likely to become the most popular research topics in the field.

Conclusion

Global trends over the past few years suggest that the field of revision TKA research will continue to grow and lead to increasing rates of publication output over the coming years. Future developments in the field will likely include more preventative and etiological studies relating to revision TKA.

Keywords: Revision, Total knee arthroplasty, Bibliometrics, Visualized study, Global trend

Introduction

Primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the only truly effective treatment for patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis, where pain relief and restoration of knee function is achieved by removing the osteoarthritic joint and replacing it with an artificial implant. Although recent research in the osteoarthritis field has seen increasing focus on developing new therapeutic treatments, an effective solution has not been found and progress in this field has been relatively slow. As such, TKA has remained the mainstream treatment for end-stage knee osteoarthritis and is an inevitable endpoint as no other clinically available treatments are able to deter disease progression [1]. The total number of primary TKA procedures increased by 6.1% from 2009 to 2010 in the USA, despite economic downturns in the 2000s [2–4]. Furthermore, the demand for primary TKA is projected to increase by 673% in the USA by 2030 [5]. These rapidly increasing numbers are due to primary TKA being the most common indication for the growing number of patients with knee osteoarthritis, as well as a downward shift in patient age where patients younger than 60 years are undergoing this procedure at an increasing rate.

Despite being a procedure with reasonably high success rates, primary TKA is still associated with a revision rate of 3–5% at 10 years for different types of implants [6, 7]. The significant increase in the number of primary TKA procedures, both in the past and projected to occur in the near future, leads to rising demand for revision TKA that is estimated to increase by over 600% from 2005 to 2030 [8]. The increasing numbers of younger patients undergoing primary TKA (approximately 15% of all patients [9, 10]) adds to this problem, as they are associated with an increased lifetime risk of revision surgery compared to older patients, and account for half of the revision surgeries underwent within the first 5 years following primary TKA [7]. Compared to primary TKA, revision TKA is more technically challenging and involves complex decision-making by the operating surgeon. The rapidly increasing number of revision TKA procedures undoubtedly remains a major challenge for public health systems, as well as researchers and clinicians working in the field. Despite this being a highly active field of research, trends in the global development of research relating to revision TKA has not been systematically studied.

Publications are a central aspect of scientific research in any field and constitute perhaps the most important indicator of research developments in a particular field. Bibliometric analysis of article metadata sourced from literature databases can provide a wealth of information on the current status of research on a particular topic area and can be used to predict trends over time in research activity. It provides a powerful but under-utilized method to analyze past, present and future developments in a chosen research field, and enables comparisons between the contributions of different scholars, journals, institutions and countries [11]. Bibliometric analysis has been used successfully to report trends in research relating to the spine [12], sepsis [13], diabetes mellitus [14], and injury [15], and can also present important factors to consider in public health decision-making [16]. Our study aims to provide a bibliometric as well as visualized analysis of the current state of research relating to revision TKA, drawing on evidence from the literature produced within the last 40 years, and use this information to predict future developments in the field.

Materials and Methods

Data Source

Publication data was retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS), which was considered to be the most suitable database for conducting bibliometric studies [17]. Bibliometric analysis was conducted using Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) in WoS.

Search Strategy

Relevant publications were searched for in SCI-E since WoS inception to 31 December 2018. The following terms were used to perform the search: theme = revision AND theme = (arthroplastyOR replacement) AND knee AND publishing year = (–2018) AND Language = (English) AND Document types = (REVIEW OR ARTICLE).

Data Collection

Article metadata for all publications satisfying the search criteria were downloaded as a TXT file from WoS, including the article title, year of publication, author names, author nationalities, author affiliations, journal name, keywords and abstract, and subsequently imported into Microsoft Excel 2017. Two authors (XD and DSJ) independently conducted data collection and extracted the relevant data for this study, and any disagreement was discussed until a consensus was reached. The two authors then manually prepared the data for analysis.

Bibliometric Anazlysis

Basic bibliometric characteristics of the included publications were analyzed using WoS built-in functions. Publication data for individual countries were refined by indexing for country/region in WoS. The H-index of countries was calculated as the number of publication outputs (H) that has each been cited at least H times by other publications, which provides an indication of research impact [18, 19]. The relative research interest (RRI), calculated on a per-year basis, was defined as the number of publications in the field divided by the total number of publications across all fields. R software (version 3.1.3) was used to plot the time curve of the predicted number of publications using the logistic regression model: f(x) = c/[1 + a × exp(− b × (x − 1981))]. Here, x is an independent variable and refers to the year, while f(x) refers to the cumulative number of publications. The inflection point was calculated by the formula T = lna/b + 1981, which was defined as the point in time at which a positive to negative growth rate of publications occurred.

Visualized Analysis

Visualized analysis of the included publications was conducted using VOSviewer software (Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands) [20]. In our study, analyses of bibliographic coupling, co-authorship, co-citation and co-occurrence were performed based on network maps constructed using the software. In the networks maps, the size of the colored dots represented the number of studies, while the thickness of the line between the dots represented the total link strength in bibliographic coupling.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism and R-studio (0.99.902, R v3.3.0). R package, including ggplot2 and bibliometrix, was used.

Results

Global Publication Trends

Number of Global Publications

A total of 6027 articles from 1981 to 2018 met the search criteria. Over this time period, the number of publications per year has increased almost linearly in the field of revision TKA research until 2010, following which greater increases were seen in the last 10 years (Fig. 1a). Correspondingly, the highest number of publications per year was seen in 2018 (576, 9.56%). The RRI in this field increased at a steady rate over the past 20 years (Fig. 1a).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Global trends and countries contributing to research in revision total knee arthroplasty. a The global number and relative research interests of publications related to revision total knee arthroplasty. The blue bars indicate the single-year publication numbers, and the black curve indicates the relative research interests. b World map showing the distribution of revision total knee arthroplasty research. c The sum of articles related to revision total knee arthroplasty research from the top 20 countries. d Model fitting curves of growth trends in worldwide publications in the field to predict number of publications in the future

Contributions of Different Countries

Publications in the field of revision TKA research came from a total of 70 countries and regions. Among these, the highest number of articles was published by the USA (2668, 44.27%), followed by England (647, 10.74%), Germany (634, 10.52%), Canada (320, 5.31%), and France (251, 4.17%) (Fig. 1b, c).

Global Publication Trends

A time curve reflecting the number of publications in the field of revision TKA research was created from a logistic regression model, which predicted future publication numbers in the field (Fig. 1d). Based on this model, the growth trend in the number of global publications was predicted to continue in the next 10 years.

Quality of Publications from Different Countries

Total Citation Frequency

The USA produced publications with the highest total citation frequency (76,808), followed by England (15,312), Canada (10,659), Germany (7436), and Sweden (6324) (Fig. 2a).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Citation frequency and H-index levels of different countries. a The total citations for revision total knee arthroplasty research articles from different countries. b The average citations per publication for articles from different countries. c The H-index of publications in the different countries

Average Citation Frequency

Sweden produced publications with the highest average citation frequency (50.27), followed by the USA (33.42), Canada (32.85), Finland (29.99), and Belgium (29.90) (Fig. 2b).

H-index

USA had the highest H-index for its number of publications and citations (122), followed by England (67), Canada (56), Sweden (43), and Germany (41) (Fig. 2c).

Analysis of Global Publications

Journal Output

Out of the top 20 journals that published the most studies on revision TKA (Fig. 3a), the Journal of Arthroplasty (2017 impact factor = 3.34) ranked first with 1129 articles. This was followed by Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (4.09) with 696 articles, and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery—American Volume (4.58) with 406 articles. The cumulative number of articles published by the top 20 journals on revision TKA per year displayed a rising trend for all journals particular after the year 2000, with the Journal of Arthroplasty, in particular, showing exponential growth in the number of articles published in the field (Fig. 3g).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Highly contributing journals, research orientations, high-impact institutions, authors, and funding sources of global research on revision total knee arthroplasty. a The main journals in the field. b The most prominent research orientations in the field. c The high-impact institutions in the field. d The high-impact authors in the field. e The major sources of funding in the field. f Top authors’ publication output over time. g Trends in the number of publications for each top journal. h Trends in the number of publications for each top author

Research Orientation

The most popular topic area by far among publications on revision TKA is orthopedics, followed by surgery and sport sciences (Fig. 3b). Other smaller but still significant topic areas include engineering, rheumatology, and general internal medicine.

Institutional Output

Out of the top 20 institutions contributing to publications on revision TKA (Fig. 3c), theMayo Clinic was ranked first (332 articles), followed by the Rothman Institute (211 articles) and Thomas Jefferson University (190 articles).

Author Output

The top 20 authors in the field of revision TKA research accounted for a total of 1,121 publications, representing 18.60% of all publications in the field (Fig. 3d). Parvizi J published by far the most articles in the field (161 articles), followed by Mont MA (96 articles) and Hanssen AD (77 articles). The total number of articles published by top authors in the field, along with the total citation count per year is shown (Fig. 3f). The cumulative number of articles published by top authors in the field displayed rising trends over time, in particular for the top-publishing author Parvizi J whose publication count displayed rapid growth since the year 2000.

Funding Sources

Publications on revision TKA were mostly industry-funded, as shown by the top 20 funding bodies (Fig. 3e). Stryker funded the most studies (61 articles), followed by Zimmer (54 articles) and Smith & Nephew (42 articles).

Bibliographic Coupling Analysis

Journals

Bibliographic coupling establishes a similarity measure between publications using citation analysis, where two publications citing a common third publication are considered ‘linked’ due to the probability of sharing a common subject matter. For publications within a particular field, a higher link strength would therefore reflect higher relevance or contribution to the field.

Journal names for all included publications were analyzed using VOSviewer, identifying 115 journals that appeared in total link strength in the field of revision TKA research (Fig. 4a). The top 5 journals that had the greatest total link strength based on bibliographic coupling were: Journal of Arthroplasty (total link strength = 656,993 times), Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (516,550), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery—American Volume (303,941), Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy (182,632), and Knee (181,395). These correspond to the same journals with the highest numbers of publication output in the field, with some slight variation in the ordering.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Bibliographic coupling analysis of global research on revision total knee arthroplasty. a Mapping of the 115 identified journals on revision total knee arthroplasty. b Mapping of the 458 institutions on revision total knee arthroplasty. c Mapping of the45 countries on revision total knee arthroplasty. The line between two points in the figure represents that two journals/institutions/countries had established a similarity relationship. The thicker the line, the closer the link between the two journals/institutions/countries. d World map showing the extent of collaboration among countries

Institutions

Institutions which have produced more than 5 publications on revision TKA were analyzed using VOSviewer, identifying a total of 458 institutions (Fig. 4b). The top institutions that had the greatest total link strength based on bibliographic coupling were: Mayo Clinic (total link strength = 312,347 times), Hospital for Special Surgery (140,173), Thomas Jefferson University (131,436), Rush University (115,327) and University of California San Francisco (103,584).

Countries

Countries which have produced more than 5 publications on revision TKA were analyzed using VOSviewer, identifying a total of 45 countries (Fig. 4c). The top 5 countries that had the greatest total link strength based on bibliographic coupling were: USA (total link strength = 1,348,232 times), England (477,136), Germany (463,970), Canada (252,707), and France (220,225). The extent of collaboration among countries in the revision TKA field is shown on a world map, which demonstrates the greatest number of links between North America and Europe (Fig. 4d).

Co-authorship Analysis

Authors

Co-authorship analysis gives a measure of the relatedness between entities based on their number of co-authored publications in a particular field. Authors who have produced more than five publications on revision TKA were analyzed using VOSviewer (Fig. 5a). The top 5 authors with the greatest total link strength based on co-authorship were: Parvizi J (total link strength = 379 times), Mong MA (328), Hanssen AD (225), Berry DJ (187), and Lewallen DG (173). These correspond to the same authors with the highest numbers of publication output in the field, with some slight variation in the ordering.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Co-authorship analysis of global research about revision total knee arthroplasty. a Mapping of the 989 authors co-authorship analysis on revision total knee arthroplasty. b Mapping of the 458 institutions co-authorship analysis on revision total knee arthroplasty. c Mapping of the45 countries co-authorship analysis on revision total knee arthroplasty. The size of the points represents the co-authorship frequency. The line between two points in the figure represents that two authors/institutions/countries had established collaboration. The thicker the line, the closer the collaboration between the two authors/institutions/countries

Institutions

The 458 institutions which have produced more than five publications on revision TKA were analyzed using VOSviewer (Fig. 5b). The top five institutions with the greatest total link strength based on co-authorship were: Mayo Clinic (total link strength = 198 times), Rush University (135), Hospital for Special Surgery (125), University of California San Francisco (118), and Toronto University (118).

Countries

The 45 countries which have produced more than five publications on revision TKA were analyzed using VOSviewer (Fig. 5c). The top five countries with the greatest total link strength based on co-authorship were: USA (total link strength = 419 times), England (225), Germany (166), Switzerland (127), and Canada (123).

Co-citation Analysis

Publications

Co-citation analysis provides a measure of the relatedness of publications based on the number of times that another publication has cited them together. For the publications included in this study, their references that were co-cited in more than 20 publications were analyzed using VOSviewer, identifying a total of 1,305 references (Fig. 6a). The top 5 studies that had the greatest total link strength based on co-citation were: Clin OrthopRelat Res. 1989 Nov;(248):13–4 (total link strength = 4,653 times), J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780–5 (4,212), N Engl J Med. 2004 Oct;351(16):1645–54 (3,780), J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999 May;81(5):672–83 (3,209), and Clin OrthopRelat Res. 1989 Nov;(248):9–12 (2,778).

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Open in a new tab

Mapping of co-citation related to revision total knee arthroplasty. a Mapping of co-cited references related to the field. The 1305 points with different colors represent the 1305 cited references. The size of the points represents the citation frequency. A line between two points means that both were cited in one paper. A shorter line indicates a closer link between two papers. Points in the same color belong to the same research direction. b Mapping of co-cited journals related to the field. The 483 points with different colors represent the 483 identified journals. The size of the points represents the citation frequency. A line between two points means that both were cited in one journal. A shorter line indicates a closer link between two journals. Points in the same color belong to the same research direction

Journals

For the publications included in this study, journal names of their references that were co-cited in more than 20 publications were analyzed using VOSviewer, identifying a total of 483 journals (Fig. 6b). The top 5 journals that had the greatest total link strength based on co-citation were: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (total link strength = 915,567 times), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery—American Volume (734,235), Journal of Arthroplasty (657,156), The Bone & Joint Journal (423,969), and Acta Orthopaedica (108,078).

Co-occurrence Analysis

Co-occurrence analysis is conducted based on the number of times that terms occur together within publications in a particular field, and can be very useful for identifying research directions and the development of new topic areas in the field [14, 21]. Words that have appeared more than 5 times in the titles and/or abstracts of all publications included in this study were identified as keywords. These 1452 identified keywords were approximately categorized into 5 clusters (Fig. 7a). The most frequently appearing keywords within each of these clusters were as follows. For “prosthesis design”, primary keywords were components, fixation, defects, wear, and osteolysis. For “periprosthetic fracture”, primary keywords were allografts, reconstruction, periprosthetic fracture, salvage, and amputation. For “periprosthetic joint infection”, primary keywords were infection, management, diagnosis, reimplantation, and debridement. For “risk factors for revision TKA”, primary keywords were outcomes, mortality, risk factors, obesity, and age. Finally, for “survivorship of implants”, primary keywords were survival, design, alignment, bearing, and prosthesis. This visualized analysis of keyword clusters and terms revealed the most prominent research directions and topic areas within the revision TKA field.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Open in a new tab

Co-occurrence analysis of global research on revision total knee arthroplasty. a Mapping of keywords for research on revision total knee arthroplasty. The size of the points represents the frequency of co-occurrence, and the keywords are divided into five clusters: prosthesis design (lower left, red), periprosthetic fracture (lower middle, purple), periprosthetic joint infection (lower right, blue), risk factors for revision TKA (upper right, green), and survivorship of implants (upper left, yellow). b Distribution of keywords according to their average time period of appearance. Keywords in blue appeared earlier than those in green and yellow, and red-colored keywords appeared later

To display the average time period for which different keywords appeared within publications on revision TKA, the keywords were color coded using VOSviewer (Fig. 7b). Keywords that on average appeared in earlier (< year 2010) and later (> year 2014) publications were coded respectively using blue and red colors, while keywords appearing between these date ranges were coded using green or yellow. It can be seen that in the early stages of revision TKA research (before 2012), the majority of studies focused on topic areas within the “prosthesis design” and “periprosthetic fracture” clusters. The other three identified clusters were the focus of more recent research, particularly “risk factors for revision TKA” and “periprosthetic joint infection”, with the latter becoming a prominent research area only within the last 2–3 years.

Discussion

Global Trends in the Field

The field of revision TKA research has been well-established since the 1990s and has seen steady growth in the rate of global publication output in the field over the last 20 years, coupled with a continued increase in relative research interest. These trends reflect the increasing acceptance and experience of surgeons in using primary TKA as a standard form of treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis and fractures around the knee region, which are inevitably associated with a small but significant rate of revision. Interestingly, despite the fact that the latest implants and surgical procedures relating to primary TKA have reduced the rate of revision in recent years, research on revision TKA has continued to increase. This may be due to a significant increase in the number of primary TKA procedures performed over the last decade due to the higher incidence of knee osteoarthritis in a rapidly ageing population, as well as knee pathologies such as osteoarthritis and fractures occurring in increasingly younger patients. Therefore, although the revision rate for primary TKA may have declined in recent years, the total demand for primary TKA has increased dramatically worldwide, which has led to a greater absolute number of revision TKA procedures.

Quality of Global Publications in the Field

When analyzing publications by country, the total and average citation frequency, as well as H-index of a particular country within a defined research field are a reflection of the country’s academic impact and quality of contributions in that field. Our study has indicated that the USA made leading contributions to the field of revision TKA research through its publications. England, Germany and Canada were the other countries that consistently made it within the top five for total number of publications, total citation frequency, and H-index, indicating strong contributions to the field. Interestingly, only the USA and Canada ranked within the top five for average citation frequency, and both of these were below Sweden as the top-ranking country for this item, highlighting a possible trend that publications from Sweden on revision TKA were focused more on quality rather than quantity.

The top journal for publishing research on revision TKA was the Journal of Arthroplasty, which published around twice the number of articles in the field compared to the second and third-ranked journals in the field, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery – American Volume respectively. Bibliographic coupling analysis indicated the same ranking for these top 3 journals, suggesting that the articles published within these journals were also the most relevant to the field. Interestingly, co-citation analysis indicated a different ranking order for these journals. This was likely due to the landmark studies in the field (those with the greatest co-citation link strength) being published mostly in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery – American Volume rather than the Journal of Arthroplasty.

The top institutions contributing to global research on revision TKA were consistently located in the USA, with the Mayo Clinic consistently occupying the top place among contributing institutions, as reflected by the total number of publications, bibliographic coupling analysis and co-authorship analysis. Worth noting is the fact that the top contributing institutions in the field, regardless of the type of analysis conducted were mostly medical centers and hospitals rather than universities, and the top contributing authors were also affiliated with these same medical centers and hospitals. This reflects an ongoing trend that the majority of publications and the most influential publications in the field were clinical studies reporting the outcomes of revision TKA procedures. With continued growth in the field, it would be interesting to see whether new research directions will evolve in the coming years that will result in more mechanistic studies, such as through kinematic analysis and computational modeling.

Research Directions in the Field

A co-occurrence network map of common keywords arising out of the publications included in this study has revealed five clusters resembling popular research directions related to revision TKA: prosthesis design, periprosthetic fracture, periprosthetic joint infection, risk factors for revision TKA, and survivorship of implants. There are some prominent themes coming out of these clusters, which carry higher weight and have greater co-occurrence link strength, such as prosthesis, infection, outcomes, surgery, follow-up, and survival. Looking at the co-occurrence map color-coded by time period of appearance, it is evident that some of these prominent terms have been longstanding in the field (prosthesis, follow-up), while others have attracted more recent research attention (outcomes, periprosthetic joint infection). These correlations give some indication of evolving research directions in the field that are likely to lead future developments. Also worth noting are the more remote topic areas that have only emerged recently (red-colored), which have not yet established substantial links with the other more prominent topic areas. These may include structural allograft, younger patients, tobacco use, and economic burden, pointing to a possible shift in the field over the coming years as these terms gain more momentum and begin to appear more frequently in conjunction with the more prominent terms. From these observations, the primary focus in this field will still be on studies investigating intervention and prevention, but it is possible that future developments will encompass new research on alternative solutions, underrepresented patient populations, additional etiological factors, and societal impact relating to revision TKA.

Additional Considerations

One of the limitations of our study was that only publications written in the English language were included for analysis by searching WoS. Considering that the majority of published studies in this field were clinical reports, it is possible that authors from non-English speaking countries would be more inclined to publish and to read studies that were in their native language since the findings would be more relevant to their patient populations and local health system. This might explain the high representation of publications on revision TKA from North America and Europe in our study since English is used as a common language in these regions, while publications from Asian countries were underrepresented despite presumably high demands for revision TKA due to their high population densities. Although we could not include all related studies globally, WoS as an internationally well-known database was used to ensure a suitable academic level for the included studies. Furthermore, the bibliographic coupling and co-citation analyses conducted in this study inevitably favor earlier publications that have had time to attract a large number of citations and may have underestimated the impact of more recent articles and associated authors, journals, institutions and countries that were published in high-quality journals but have not yet built up a significant amount of citations. These considerations should be noted when interpreting the results presented in our study.

Conclusions

The present study showed the past, present and future global trends in revision TKA research as demonstrated through bibliometric and visualized analyses. The USA was the leading contributor to this research field, together with many of its authors and institutions. The Journal of Arthroplasty was the most relevant journal, although Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research had the greatest co-citation link strength with other publications in the field. With continued expansion in the field over the coming years, the most prominent research topics in the near future are predicted to be relating to risk factors for revision TKA and periprosthetic joint infection. In combination with the better understanding gained in multidisciplinary research areas such as biomaterials design and mechanistic studies, the global demand for revision TKA will hopefully decline in the future due to improved outcomes and longevity of primary and revision TKA procedures.

Funding

This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81973606, 81802204, 81501919), Peking University People’s Hospital Scientific Research Development Funds (No. RDH 2017-05), Natural Science Foundation of Beijing (No. 7212118), Beijing Science and Technology Major Projects (No. Z181100001818008).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard statement

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the any of the authors

Informed consent

For this type of study informed consent is not required.

Footnotes

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Shengjie Dong, Email: Dongdongshengjay@126.com.

Yu Zhao, Email: zhaoyu20806@163.com.

Jiao Jiao Li, Email: Jiaojiao.Li@uts.edu.au.

Dan Xing, Email: lovetroy@126.com.

References

  • 1.Bijlsma JW, Berenbaum F, Lafeber FP. Osteoarthritis: An update with relevance for clinical practice. Lancet. 2011;377:2115–2126. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60243-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Slover J, Zuckerman JD. Increasing use of total knee replacement and revision surgery. JAMA. 2012;308:1266–1268. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.12644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cram P, Lu X, Kates SL, et al. Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991–2010. JAMA. 2012;308:1227–1236. doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Iorio R, Davis CM, Healy WL, et al. Impact of the economic downturn on adult reconstruction surgery: A survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons. Journal of Arthroplasty. 2010;25:1005–1014. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.08.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Jasper LL, Jones CA, Mollins J, et al. Risk factors for revision of total knee arthroplasty: A scoping review. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2016;17:182. doi: 10.1186/s12891-016-1025-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Sezgin EA, Robertsson O, W-Dahl A,, et al. Nonagenarians qualify for total knee arthroplasty: A report on 329 patients from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register 2000–2016. Acta Orthopaedica. 2019;90:53–59. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1530173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bayliss LE, Culliford D, Monk AP, et al. The effect of patient age at intervention on risk of implant revision after total replacement of the hip or knee: a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2017;389:1424–1430. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30059-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume. 2007;89:780–785. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200704000-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Garriga C, Murphy J, Leal J, et al. Impact of a national enhanced recovery after surgery programme on patient outcomes of primary total knee replacement: an interrupted time series analysis from The National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2019;2:2. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2019.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Vertullo CJ, Graves SE, Cuthbert AR, et al. The effect of surgeon preference for selective patellar resurfacing on revision risk in total knee replacement: An instrumental variable analysis of 136,116 procedures from the Australian orthopaedic association national joint replacement registry. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume. 2019;101:1261–1270. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.01350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Pu QH, Lyu QJ, Su HY. Bibliometric analysis of scientific publications in transplantation journals from Mainland China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan between 2006 and 2015. British Medical Journal Open. 2016;6:e011623. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011623. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Jia ZW, Wu YH, Li H, et al. Growing trend of China's contribution to the field of spine: a 10-year survey of the literature. European Spine Journal. 2015;24:1806–1812. doi: 10.1007/s00586-015-4030-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Zhang K, Zhao J, Chu L, et al. China's growing contribution to sepsis research from 1984 to 2014: A bibliometric study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e7275. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007275. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Gao Y, Wang Y, Zhai X, et al. Publication trends of research on diabetes mellitus and T cells (1997–2016): A 20-year bibliometric study. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0184869. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184869. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Luo P, Xu D, Wu J, et al. The top 100 cited of injury-international journal of the care of the injured: A bibliometric analysis. Injury. 2017;48:2625–2633. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.10.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Avcu G, Sahbudak Bal Z, Duyu M, et al. Thanks to trauma: A delayed diagnosis of pott disease. Pediatric Emergency Care. 2015;31:e17–18. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000000637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Aggarwal A, Lewison G, Idir S, et al. The state of lung cancer research: A global analysis. Journal of Thoracic Oncology. 2016;11:1040–1050. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.03.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bornmann L, Daniel HD. The state of h index research. Is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance. EMBO Reports. 2009;10:2–6. doi: 10.1038/embor.2008.233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bertoli-Barsotti L, Lando T. A theoretical model of the relationship between theh-index and other simple citation indicators. Scientometrics. 2017;111:1415–1448. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2351-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Synnestvedt MB, Chen C, Holmes JH. CiteSpace II: Visualization and knowledge discovery in bibliographic databases. AMIA Annu Symposium Proceeding. 2005;2:724–728. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Li T, Ho YS, Li CY. Bibliometric analysis on global Parkinson's disease research trends during 1991–2006. Neuroscience Letters. 2008;441:248–252. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2008.06.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Indian Journal of Orthopaedics are provided here courtesy of Indian Orthopaedic Association

RESOURCES