Faculty Opinions recommendation of The effects of tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Tourniquets are still widely used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), although they may be associated with several adverse effects. An observer-blinded, randomized, controlled trial was performed to evaluate the effects of tourniquet use in TKA.METHODS: Fifty participants who underwent staged bilateral TKA were recruited for this study. The first-side TKA was randomly allocated to either long-duration tourniquet use or short-duration tourniquet use followed by a 3-month washout period and crossover to the other tourniquet strategy for the opposite-side TKA. Blood loss was monitored perioperatively. The operating time, allogeneic blood transfusion rate, thigh pain, knee pain, limb swelling, clinical outcome as measured by the Likert-type Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) score, straight leg raising and knee active range of motion (ROM) were also recorded.RESULTS: The long-duration tourniquet group exhibited reduced total blood loss [-99.1 ml, 95 % confidence interval (CI) -168.1 to -30.1, P = 0.0411] and intraoperative blood loss (-225.2 ml, 95 % CI -369.5 to -80.9, P = 0.0071) compared with the short-duration tourniquet group. However, there were greater postoperative blood loss (69.6 ml, 95 % CI 21.1 to 118.2, P = 0.0282) and hidden blood loss (52.8 ml, 95 % CI 10.5 to 95.1, P = 0.0332) in the long-duration tourniquet group. The short-duration tourniquet group showed better outcomes for thigh and knee pain, limb swelling, WOMAC score at 6-week follow-up, straight leg raising and knee ROM. Similar allogeneic blood transfusion rates were observed for both groups.CONCLUSION: Total and intraoperative blood losses were reduced with the long-duration tourniquet use, whereas the short-duration tourniquet use would reduce postoperative and hidden blood losses without increasing the allogeneic blood transfusion rate. In addition, short-duration tourniquet use would result in faster recovery and less pain during the early rehabilitation period following TKA.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I. PMID: 26745962 Funding information This work was supported by: Peking University People's Hospital Research and Development Funds, United States Grant ID: RDC2013-06
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 | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.110 | 0.009 |
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".