ArticleArthroplasty today2024
Randomized Controlled Trial of Irrigation-Coupled Bipolar Electrocautery Versus Tourniquet in Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recovery from total knee arthroplasty remains arduous for some patients, prompting interest in perioperative management. While tourniquet use is not associated with longer-term outcomes, its effect on quadriceps strength in the immediate postoperative window is unknown. Methods: A single-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of 66 patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty from 2019 to 2022 was performed to compare the use of an irrigation-coupled bipolar device (ICBD) and no tourniquet (ICBD group, N = 34) to tourniquet use with no ICBD (tourniquet group, N = 32). Groups were similar with respect to age, sex, and obesity. The primary outcome was quadriceps strength at 2 weeks, measured using a handheld dynamometer and standardized to the contralateral side. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement was measured with the difference from baseline serving as a secondary outcome. Comparisons were performed using the Student's t-test. Results: Only 28 patients, 14 in each group, had primary outcome data. At 2-weeks, quadriceps strength was higher in the ICBD group compared to the tourniquet group (83% vs 70%), though not statistically significant ( Conclusions: Tourniquet use was associated with a small but not statistically significant difference in quadriceps strength at 2 weeks that may justify further study given the loss of power here. There can be limitations to conducting randomized controlled trials that are important for early-career investigators to consider and that were magnified due to COVID-related restrictions in the present study, which we discuss. Level of Evidence: Level II.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.