I can't imagine that a quality journal would involve reviewers and these would not ask for any revision, even a minor one. All my papers had a request for revision. I have reviewed papers myself and one is tempted to find something to show that one really read the paper carefully. So, I recon that only a very minor part of the manuscripts are accepted as such wihtout revision, a few percent...
It is too small of a number to really consider. In the best journal in my field, they have accepted just 2 papers without revision in almost 30 years (~300 papers a year is typical for this journal). In my general field, it seems that for general-case papers in legitimate journals, the reject rate is ~60%, the minor revisions is 5%, and the major revisions are the rest. Accept without revision is in the margin of error somewhere.
Revision of manuscript depend on quality of work. Revision improve the quality. In general SCI journals and paper in conference proceeding may ask for revision. Even Book and Patent ask for revision.
First of all, it depends on what we mean when we say "article". Secondly, it depends on what we mean when we say that an article is accepted without a revision. A peer review journal does not accept contributions without making one or more revisions, most of all if we're talking about original researches. Considering this, it is almost impossible to get published without any kind of revision, even if you submit a brief review of someone's book.