Is Intraarticular Administration of Tranexamic Acid Better than Its Intravenous Administration in Reducing Blood loss after total Knee Arthroplasty?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Intravenous (IV) tranexamic acid (TXA) is a goodpotent agent in controlling postoperative blood loss following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Recently, intraarticular usage of this agent has also shown good results. Aims: Comparison of postoperative blood loss between IV(intravenous) and topical administration of TXA tranexamic acid in TKAs(total knee arthroplasty) Materials and Design: Eighty-six TKAs on knees were included in ourstudy. Randomization was done, so that in our study 40 TKA received 1 g of IV TXA, while 46 had underwent intraarticular administration of 1 gm of TXA. Subjects and Methods: We have compared the postoperative blood loss by calculating the difference in pre-and postop hemoglobin and the need for blood transfusion for patients .The functional assessment was done on basis of Western Ontario McMaster Osteo-Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and complications like postoperative infection, oozing from wound site and thromboembolic manifestations. Results: The blood loss was significantly less in the intraarticular administration group as compared to the IV injection group. The total blood loss, blood transfusion, and drain output was also less but the difference was not significant. The functional assessment (WOMAC) scores were equivocal and so were the complications including thromboembolic manifestations (
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".