MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319934862 · doi:10.21037/aoj-22-33

Radiofrequency ablation prior to total knee arthroplasty does not improve post-surgical pain or recovery: a double-blinded, multi-center, randomized clinical trial

2023· article· en· W4319934862 on OpenAlex
Jeffrey Lyman, Adam J. Olscamp, Timothy P. Lovell, Corbett D. Winegar, Alexi N. Wilson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Joint · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialArthroplastyOxford knee scoreRadiofrequency ablationPulsed radiofrequencyOpioidProspective cohort studyNarcoticAnesthesiaVisual analogue scaleSurgeryPhysical therapyAblationInternal medicinePain relief

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) targeting the genicular nerves is an effective treatment for knee pain due to osteoarthritis. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of two RFA interventions delivered preoperatively on early postoperative pain management and subjective outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: One hundred forty-three participants were enrolled in this double blinded, sham-controlled prospective randomized trial. Participants assigned at random to traditional RFA (t-RFA) (n=50), cooled RFA (c-RFA) (n=49), or sham (n=44) procedures prior to TKA. Outcomes were recorded at postoperative day 3, week 1, week 2, week 12, month 6, and month 12 following TKA. Primary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), opioid consumption (reported as MEQ, or daily morphine equivalents), time to narcotic cessation (reported in days), and pain scores (reported as NRS, or Numeric Rating Scale). Secondary outcomes included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) measures. All side effects and complications were reported. Participants were followed for a year to detect any unexpected side effects. Results: Compared with sham controls, t-RFA and c-RFA did not affect inpatient LOS, pain scores, or opioid consumption. There were no reductions in time to opioid cessation, pain scores, or WOMAC scores at any time point post-TKA. Conclusions: RFA of the genicular nerves prior to TKA did not affect opioid use or time to cessation, pain, or WOMAC scores, following TKA. Current techniques of t-RFA and c-RFA of these specific geniculate nerves preoperatively are not indicated as routine interventions to improve short-term surgical recovery after TKA. Trial Registration: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02925442).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it