THE ROLE OF TRANEXAMIC ACID (TXA) IN TOTAL ANKLE ARTHROPLASTY (TAA): A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been used in different orthopedicdepartments to reduce blood loss, transfusions, hemarthrosis, wound formation, infections, and other related complications. Nonetheless, the role or efficacy of Tranexamic acid (TXA) in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) is not precisely depicted. This systematic review aims to report the role or efficacy of Tranexamic acid (TXA) in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). This study conducted to find out the role or efficacy of Tranexamic acid (TXA) in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). Database searches were conducted for eligible studies from 26thFebruary 2002 to 26th October 2022. Clinical studies on the use of Tranexamic acid in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) were included. The outcomes were projected blood loss, hemarthrosis, change in hemoglobin, wound infections, and complications. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. In six studies, Tranexamic acid (TXA) was found to be effective in reducing wound formations, infections, and complications in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). However, two studies reported the use of Tranexamic acid (TXA) in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) as non-effective. Six studies reported on blood loss, in which, in 4 studies there was no significant difference in blood loss between patients that received Tranexamic acid (TXA) during total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) and the control group. However, in twostudies Tranexamic acid (TXA) was found to be effective in reducing blood loss. In conclusion, Tranexamic acid (TXA) is associated with reduced wound formations, infections, and complications in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). Additionally, TXA does not significantly reduce blood loss in total ankle arthroplasty.
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 | 0.006 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".