Efficacy of interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (iPACK) block versus periarticular local infiltration analgesia after unilateral total knee arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (iPACK) block with periarticular local infiltration analgesia (LIA) to assess postoperative pain control and enhanced recovery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: This research was carried out at King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from September 2020 to March 2021. Eighty Patients scheduled for elective unilateral TKA were randomized to receive either iPACK or periarticular LIA along with adductor canal block under spinal anesthesia. The primary outcome was postoperative pain score, and secondary outcomes included physical rehabilitation, duration of surgery, length of post-anesthesia care unit stay, hemodynamics, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The pain score during activity in iPACK group was significantly lower compared to LIA group at 4 hours postoperatively, but no significant difference was observed at 24 or 48 hours. The timed up and go test took significantly longer for patients in LIA group at 4, 24, and 48 hours compared to those in iPACK group. No significant differences in knee range of motion were observed between the 2 groups at any point. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, iPACK block is an effective technique in reducing pain in the immediate postoperative period without affecting motor function, resulting in enhanced recovery following primary TKA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".