Local tissue concentrations of cefazolin during total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) following joint arthroplasty are now the leading cause of reoperation and are associated with serious morbidity to the patient, often requiring several staged operations and a prolonged course of parenteral antibiotics. Prophylactic administration of intravenous antibiotics before skin incision is arguably the most important measure to prevent PJI; however, the dose effectiveness of cefazolin in target tissue is not well known. We aimed to identify parameters affecting local tissue concentration (LTC) of cefazolin. METHODS: We performed a literature search using the following keywords: "orthopaedics," "orthopedic," "arthroplasty" and "cefazolin." We included studies that measured LTC of cefazolin from samples obtained during either a total knee or total hip arthroplasty. RESULTS: = 1). CONCLUSION: Few studies have measured LTC levels of antibiotics (or levels of cefazolin) to validate current recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis in orthopedic surgery. With infection as the leading reason for early reoperation or revision surgery, the parameters affecting LTC during orthopedic procedures need to be further assessed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".