The Impact of Tourniquet Usage on TKA Outcome: A Single-Center Prospective Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) are the most effective surgical treatment for end-stage knee osteoarthritis. The tourniquet is used to reduce intraoperative blood loss, improving surgical field visualization. There is much controversy regarding the effectiveness and safety of using a tourniquet during total knee arthroplasties. The purpose of this prospective study is to determine the effect of tourniquet usage during TKAs on early functional outcomes and pain in our center. Materials and Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of patients following a primary total knee replacement between October 2020 and August 2021. We recorded presurgical data, which included age, sex and knee range of motion. Intraoperatively, we measured the amount of blood aspiration and the surgical room time. After the surgery, we measured the amount of blood aspirated through the drains and the hemoglobin. We measured flexion, extension, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC score) scores for the functional evaluation. Results: We included 96 patients in the T group and 94 in the NT group, respectively, who remained until the last follow-up. Regarding blood loss, the NT group demonstrated significantly lower levels: 245 ± 97.8 mL intraoperative and 324.8 ± 151.65 mL postoperative, compared to the T group, where we recorded 276 ± 109.2 mL during the surgical procedures and 353.44 ± 101.55 mL after the surgery, (p < 0.05). We also recorded significantly shorter operative room time for the NT group, (p < 0.05). During the follow-up, we noticed postoperative improvements but without significant differences between the groups. Conclusions: We found a significant decrease in bleeding after no tourniquet usage during total knee replacements and shorter operative times. On the other hand, the knee function demonstrated no significant differences between the groups. Further studies may be required in order to assess complications.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".