Eugene S. Krauss MD , Ayal Segal MD , Barry G. Simonson MD , Nancy Dengler NP , MaryAnne Cronin PharmD
{"title":"单极电烧与双极封口器在减少全膝关节置换术失血量方面的比较:前瞻性、随机、非劣效性研究","authors":"Eugene S. Krauss MD , Ayal Segal MD , Barry G. Simonson MD , Nancy Dengler NP , MaryAnne Cronin PharmD","doi":"10.1016/j.artd.2024.101509","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>This was a noninferiority trial to evaluate blood loss during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) when using the unipolar electrocautery system compared to the saline coupled bipolar sealer system in primary TKA.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>One hundred sixty-four patients were randomly assigned by a 1:1 ratio to either the unipolar electrocautery system (N = 82) or bipolar sealer system (N = 82). Inclusion criteria included patients scheduled for primary unilateral TKA, preoperative hemoglobin ≥11 mg/dL, preoperative platelet count ≥150,000, age >18 years, and patient willing to complete all study-related procedures. The primary efficacy outcome was estimated blood loss on morning of postoperative day. Secondary efficacy outcomes were comparison between the preoperative hemoglobin and postoperative day 1 hemoglobin, and allogeneic blood transfusions. Additionally, the study collected objective and functional outcomes using the postoperative 2011 Knee Society Score.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The unipolar electrocautery system was not found to be less efficacious than the bipolar sealer system. Mean blood loss for the unipolar electrocautery system was 1062.0 cubic centimeters (cc) (95% confidence limit for the mean: 985.2, 1138.7), and for the bipolar sealer system was 929.4 cc (95% confidence limit for the mean: 841.9, 1016.8). The mean difference in blood loss was 132.6 cc, below the margin of inferiority set at 200 cc. Additionally, there was no difference in patient outcomes as measured by the Knee Society Score.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The safety, efficacy, and outcomes profile of the unipolar electrocautery system compared to the bipolar sealer system were similar. Use of the bipolar sealer system significantly increases surgical cost without any added benefits.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37940,"journal":{"name":"Arthroplasty Today","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 101509"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344124001948/pdfft?md5=ef8798728d34191e86ad877dc7d1bdef&pid=1-s2.0-S2352344124001948-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the Unipolar Electrocautery and the Bipolar Sealer in Reducing Blood Loss in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Noninferiority Study\",\"authors\":\"Eugene S. Krauss MD , Ayal Segal MD , Barry G. Simonson MD , Nancy Dengler NP , MaryAnne Cronin PharmD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.artd.2024.101509\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>This was a noninferiority trial to evaluate blood loss during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) when using the unipolar electrocautery system compared to the saline coupled bipolar sealer system in primary TKA.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>One hundred sixty-four patients were randomly assigned by a 1:1 ratio to either the unipolar electrocautery system (N = 82) or bipolar sealer system (N = 82). Inclusion criteria included patients scheduled for primary unilateral TKA, preoperative hemoglobin ≥11 mg/dL, preoperative platelet count ≥150,000, age >18 years, and patient willing to complete all study-related procedures. The primary efficacy outcome was estimated blood loss on morning of postoperative day. Secondary efficacy outcomes were comparison between the preoperative hemoglobin and postoperative day 1 hemoglobin, and allogeneic blood transfusions. Additionally, the study collected objective and functional outcomes using the postoperative 2011 Knee Society Score.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The unipolar electrocautery system was not found to be less efficacious than the bipolar sealer system. Mean blood loss for the unipolar electrocautery system was 1062.0 cubic centimeters (cc) (95% confidence limit for the mean: 985.2, 1138.7), and for the bipolar sealer system was 929.4 cc (95% confidence limit for the mean: 841.9, 1016.8). The mean difference in blood loss was 132.6 cc, below the margin of inferiority set at 200 cc. Additionally, there was no difference in patient outcomes as measured by the Knee Society Score.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The safety, efficacy, and outcomes profile of the unipolar electrocautery system compared to the bipolar sealer system were similar. Use of the bipolar sealer system significantly increases surgical cost without any added benefits.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37940,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroplasty Today\",\"volume\":\"29 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101509\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344124001948/pdfft?md5=ef8798728d34191e86ad877dc7d1bdef&pid=1-s2.0-S2352344124001948-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroplasty Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344124001948\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroplasty Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344124001948","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of the Unipolar Electrocautery and the Bipolar Sealer in Reducing Blood Loss in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Noninferiority Study
Background
This was a noninferiority trial to evaluate blood loss during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) when using the unipolar electrocautery system compared to the saline coupled bipolar sealer system in primary TKA.
Methods
One hundred sixty-four patients were randomly assigned by a 1:1 ratio to either the unipolar electrocautery system (N = 82) or bipolar sealer system (N = 82). Inclusion criteria included patients scheduled for primary unilateral TKA, preoperative hemoglobin ≥11 mg/dL, preoperative platelet count ≥150,000, age >18 years, and patient willing to complete all study-related procedures. The primary efficacy outcome was estimated blood loss on morning of postoperative day. Secondary efficacy outcomes were comparison between the preoperative hemoglobin and postoperative day 1 hemoglobin, and allogeneic blood transfusions. Additionally, the study collected objective and functional outcomes using the postoperative 2011 Knee Society Score.
Results
The unipolar electrocautery system was not found to be less efficacious than the bipolar sealer system. Mean blood loss for the unipolar electrocautery system was 1062.0 cubic centimeters (cc) (95% confidence limit for the mean: 985.2, 1138.7), and for the bipolar sealer system was 929.4 cc (95% confidence limit for the mean: 841.9, 1016.8). The mean difference in blood loss was 132.6 cc, below the margin of inferiority set at 200 cc. Additionally, there was no difference in patient outcomes as measured by the Knee Society Score.
Conclusions
The safety, efficacy, and outcomes profile of the unipolar electrocautery system compared to the bipolar sealer system were similar. Use of the bipolar sealer system significantly increases surgical cost without any added benefits.
期刊介绍:
Arthroplasty Today is a companion journal to the Journal of Arthroplasty. The journal Arthroplasty Today brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement of the hip and knee in an open-access, online format. Arthroplasty Today solicits manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas of scientific endeavor that relate to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with patient outcomes, economic and policy issues, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, and biologic response to arthroplasty. The journal focuses on case reports. It is the purpose of Arthroplasty Today to present material to practicing orthopaedic surgeons that will keep them abreast of developments in the field, prove useful in the care of patients, and aid in understanding the scientific foundation of this subspecialty area of joint replacement. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal''s area of interest. Their participation ensures that each issue of Arthroplasty Today provides the reader with timely, peer-reviewed articles of the highest quality.