Architecture Decision Records: do you actually review them, or do they become a write-only graveyard?

We adopted ADRs (Michael Nygard format) about 8 months ago. We have 47 ADRs in our repo. The problem: nobody reads them after writing them. When a new engineer joins, they don't know which ADRs are still valid vs. superseded by later decisions. We tried adding 'status' fields (proposed, accepted, deprecated, superseded) but the deprecation process itself requires someone to notice and update — which rarely happens. Some teams I've talked to treat ADRs as living documents tied to PRs (every architecture-affecting PR must reference or create an ADR). Others use them as post-hoc documentation after the decision is already made in a meeting. What's your experience? - Do ADRs actually prevent re-litigating old decisions? - How do you handle ADRs that become outdated? - Is there a tool or workflow that makes them actually useful, or is the format itself the bottleneck?