Association between Allogeneic Blood Transfusion and Wound Infection after Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Background: To assess using a retrospective case control study, whether patients undergoing primary, elective total hip or knee arthroplasty who receive blood transfusion have a higher rate of post-operative infection compared to those who do not.Materials and Methods: Data on elective primary total hip or knee arthroplasty patients, including patient characteristics, co-morbidities, type and duration of surgery, blood transfusion, deep and superficial infection was extracted from the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI). Logistic regression analysis was used to compare deep infection and superficial infection in blood-transfused and non-transfused cohorts.Results: Of the 27892 patients identified, 3098 (11.1%) received blood transfusion (TKA 9.7%; THA 13.1%). Overall, the rate of superficial infection (SI) was 0.5% and deep infection (DI) was 1.1%. The infection rates in the transfused cohort were SI 1.0% and DI 1.6%, and in the non-transfused cohort were SI 0.5% and DI 1.0%. The transfused cohort had an increased risk of superficial infection (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.9 [95% CI 1.2-2.9, p-value 0.005]) as well as deep infection (adjusted OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.1-2.2, p-value 0.008]).Conclusion: The odds of superficial and deep wound infection are significantly increased in primary, elective total hip and knee arthroplasty patients who receive blood transfusion compared to those who did not. This study can potentially help in reducing periprosthetic hip or knee infections.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".