Additional benefit of local infiltration of analgesia to femoral nerve block in total knee arthroplasty: double-blind randomized control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Multimodal analgesia has become an important concept in current pain management following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, controversy remains over what is the most accepted combination. In this study, the additional benefits of local infiltration of analgesia to femoral nerve block were evaluated. METHODS: Forty patients were randomly allocated into a combined local infiltration of analgesia and femoral nerve block or femoral nerve block alone group. In the former, analgesic drugs consisting of ropivacaine and dexamethasone were injected into the peri-articular tissues, while the same amount of saline was injected into the femoral nerve block group. The primary outcome measure was the total amount of fentanyl consumption by the patient-controlled analgesia pump during the 48-h post-operative period. RESULTS: A combination of local infiltration of analgesia and femoral nerve block had less total fentanyl consumption and a larger knee ROM at post-operative day 2 than femoral nerve block alone (p < 0.05). C-reactive protein levels in the combined treatment group were significantly lower than the femoral nerve block group at post-operative day 3 (p < 0.01). There was no difference between the two groups, post-operatively, on the visual analogue scale for pain at rest or while walking, quadriceps strength, timed up and go test, circumference of thigh, Knee Society Score, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. CONCLUSION: The addition of local infiltration of analgesia to femoral nerve block promoted post-operative pain relief and the recovery of knee ROM in the early post-operative period. This combination is an effective method for post-operative pain management after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Randomized controlled trial, Level I.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".