MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744853619 · doi:10.1177/1071100717722366

Liposomal Bupivacaine Versus Continuous Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block in Total Ankle Arthroplasty

2017· article· en· W2744853619 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan P. Mulligan, Joel Morash, James K. DeOrio, Selene G. Parekh

Bibliographic record

VenueFoot & Ankle International · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFoot and ankle surgeryNarcoticAnkleVisual analogue scaleAnesthesiaSurgeryRopivacaineOrthopedic surgeryArthroplastyAdverse effectLocal anestheticComplicationBupivacaine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is widely used in joint arthroplasty, but there is little reported on the use of LB in foot and ankle surgery. Continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block (CPSNB) is more commonly used for major foot and ankle reconstructions. The purpose of this study was to compare use of intraoperative LB injection to CPSNB as a regional anesthetic for total ankle arthroplasty (TAA), with attention to postoperative pain scores, narcotic use, and complications. METHODS: Retrospective review of TAA patients of 2 fellowship-trained orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons was performed. Patients received either preoperative single-shot popliteal sciatic nerve block with 0.2% ropivacaine followed by intraoperative injection of LB or preoperative CPSNB alone. Outcomes examined were visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at 8 hours, 24 hours, 1 week, and 3 weeks following surgery; need for opioid pain medication refill; physician office notification for pain issues or other adverse events; and complications within the first 90 days following surgery. Standard statistical analysis was performed, and P < .05 was considered significant. Seventy-five patients were identified who underwent TAA and met inclusion criteria. Forty-one received LB, and 34 received CPSNB. RESULTS: No statistical difference was seen between groups with regard to complications, emergency department visits, readmissions, reoperations, VAS pain score at any time point, physician office contacts, and narcotic refills. Sixteen of 41 (39%) LB patients had narcotic refills, versus 12 of 34 (35%) CPSNB patients ( P = .81). Two of 41 (5%) LB patients had a complication postoperatively, versus 4 of 34 (12%) CPSNB patients. There were no complications specific to the anesthetic used in either group. CONCLUSION: This is the first study evaluating the use of LB for total ankle arthroplasty. Liposomal bupivacaine was safe and effective as an option for regional anesthetic and postoperative pain control, with comparable results to CPSNB. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoot & Ankle InternationalSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207