Cryotherapy following total knee replacement

Sam Adie; Amy Kwan; Justine M Naylor; Ian A Harris; Rajat Mittal

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007911.pub2

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Contenido relacionado

Ir a:

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados
Respuestas clínicas Cochrane
Guías
Temas

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Respuestas clínicas Cochrane

Topics

Temas

Figure 1

Study flow diagram

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 3

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.12 COMBINED Blood loss.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.12 COMBINED Blood loss.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 5

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.16 Pain at POD 2 VAS.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.1 Adverse Events.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 7

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.24 Transfusion Rate.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 8

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.6 COMBINED Analgesic use.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 9

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.20 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of flexion at discharge.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 10

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Any cold vs. Any control, outcome: 1.14 Length of Hospital Stay ‐ Days.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 1 Blood loss ‐ total body mL.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 2 Blood loss ‐ wound drainage mL/24hrs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 3 Blood loss ‐ wound drainage mL/48hrs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 4 Blood loss ‐ total wound drainage mL.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 5 Blood loss ‐ Hb drop mmol/L/24hrs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 6 COMBINED Blood loss.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 7 COMBINED Blood Loss CEMENT&NO‐CEMENT.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 8 Analgesic use mg/kg/48hrs of morphine equivalent.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 9 Pain at POD 2 VAS.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 10 Pain at POD 3 VAS.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 11 Adverse Events.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 12 Transfusion Rate.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 13 Analgesic use mg/kg/24hrs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 14 Pain at POD 1 VAS.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 15 Analgesic use mg/kg/72hrs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 16 Analgesia use total mg/kg.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.17

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 17 COMBINED Analgesic use.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.18

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 18 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of knee flexion POD 1‐6.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.19

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 19 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of knee flexion POD 7‐14.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.20

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 20 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of flexion at discharge.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.21

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 21 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of flexion at 3 months.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.22

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 22 COMBINED Swelling postoperative at midpatella in mm.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.23

Comparison 1 Any cold vs. Any control, Outcome 23 Length of Hospital Stay ‐ Days.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Any cold vs. Any control (Sensitivity analyses excluding studies with bilateral TKRs)), Outcome 1 COMBINED Blood loss.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Any cold vs. Any control (Sensitivity analyses excluding studies with bilateral TKRs)), Outcome 2 Adverse Events.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Any cold vs. Any control (Sensitivity analyses excluding studies with bilateral TKRs)), Outcome 3 Transfusion Rate.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Any cold therapy compared to any control for patients undergoing total knee replacement

Any cold therapy compared to any control for patients undergoing total knee replacement
Patient or population: patients with patients undergoing total knee replacement Settings: Post‐operative Intervention: Any cold therapy Comparison: Any control
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of Participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Any control	Any cold therapy
Blood loss Follow‐up: mean 13 days	The mean blood loss ranged across control groups from 519‐1285 ml	The mean Blood loss in the intervention groups was 0.46 standard deviations lower (0.84 to 0.08 lower)		666 (10 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,2,3,4	The SMD was converted to a clinically meaningful measure using Smith 2002. Absolute risk difference: 225mL less blood loss in cryotherapy group (95% CI, 39 to 410mL less blood loss). Relative percent change = 24% (95% CI 4% to 46%).
Pain at post‐operative day 2 Scale from: 0 to 10. Follow‐up: 2 days	The mean pain at post‐operative day 2 in the control groups ranged from 4.8 to 9.0 points	The mean Pain at post‐operative day 2 in the intervention groups was 1.32 lower (2.37 to 0.27 lower)		322 (4 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,3	Absolute risk difference: 1.3 VAS points lower in cryotherapy group (95% CI 2.37 to 0.27 VAS points lower). Relative percent change 28% lower (95% CI 6% to 49% lower). Smith 2002 was used as a reference study.
Adverse events Adverse events included discomfort, local skin reactions, superficial infections, cold induced injuries and thrombolytic events Follow‐up: 0‐30 days	34 per 1000	34 per 1000 (10 to 118)	RR: 0.98 (0.28 to 3.47)	675 (11 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,2,3,5	RR was calculated from estimable studies (>0 event rate). Absolute risk difference: 2% (‐3% to 3%). Relative percent change: ‐2% (95% CI ‐72% to 247%).
Range of motion at discharge Scale from: 0 to 125. Follow‐up: mean 11 days	The mean range of motion at discharge in the control groups ranged from 62.9 to 76.8 degrees	The mean Range of motion at discharge in the intervention groups was 11.39 higher (4.13 to 18.66 higher)		107 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2,3	Absolute risk difference: 11.39 more degrees of flexion (95% CI 4.13 to 18.66). Relative percent change: 18% more flexion (95% CI 7% to 30%).
Transfusion rate Follow‐up: 0‐13 days	370 per 1000	788 per 1000 (15 to 1000)	RR 2.13 (0.04 to 109.63)	91 (2 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,3,6	Absolute risk difference: 11% (‐83% to 106%). Relative percent change: 113% (‐96% to 10863%).
Function ‐ not measured	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	‐	See comment	This outcome was not measured in any of our studies.
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio;
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
¹ Majority of studies lacked allocation concealment, blinding, follow‐up and had evidence of selective reporting of outcomes ² Outcome was measured over different periods of time ³ Different control groups and variations of intervention groups were used ⁴ Standardised mean differences used may have affected consistency of results of studies ⁵ Definitions of adverse events varied across studies ⁶ Low event and participants

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Any cold therapy compared to any control for patients undergoing total knee replacement

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 1. Any cold vs. Any control

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Blood loss ‐ total body mL Show forest plot	2	140	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐637.06 [‐753.61, ‐520.50]

1.1 Cold Compression vs. Compression	2	140	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐637.06 [‐753.61, ‐520.50]
2 Blood loss ‐ wound drainage mL/24hrs Show forest plot	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

2.1 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
3 Blood loss ‐ wound drainage mL/48hrs Show forest plot	4	273	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐165.98 [‐271.73, ‐60.23]

3.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐75.30 [‐261.22, 110.62]
3.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	2	129	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐187.45 [‐321.12, ‐53.78]
3.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1	60	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐480.0 [‐949.99, ‐10.01]
4 Blood loss ‐ total wound drainage mL Show forest plot	2	66	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐107.70 [‐268.52, 53.12]

4.1 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1	36	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐188.0 [‐458.89, 82.89]
4.2 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐64.0 [‐263.84, 135.84]
5 Blood loss ‐ Hb drop mmol/L/24hrs Show forest plot	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

5.1 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
6 COMBINED Blood loss Show forest plot	10	666	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.46 [‐0.84, ‐0.08]

6.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.18 [‐0.60, 0.25]
6.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	3	212	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.27 [‐0.75, 0.21]
6.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	5	340	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.68 [‐1.35, 0.00]
6.4 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.16 [‐0.88, 0.56]
7 COMBINED Blood Loss CEMENT&NO‐CEMENT Show forest plot	10	662	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.55 [‐0.99, ‐0.11]

7.1 Cement	5	295	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.34 [‐0.92, 0.23]
7.2 No Cement	5	367	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.82 [‐1.53, ‐0.10]
8 Analgesic use mg/kg/48hrs of morphine equivalent Show forest plot	4	255	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.16 [‐0.37, 0.05]

8.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.10 [‐0.23, 0.03]
8.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	31	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.14 [‐0.30, 0.02]
8.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	2	140	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.19 [‐0.66, 0.28]
9 Pain at POD 2 VAS Show forest plot	4	322	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.32 [‐2.37, ‐0.27]

9.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.5 [‐1.33, 0.33]
9.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	98	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐2.71 [‐5.43, 0.01]
9.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	2	140	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.40 [‐2.28, ‐0.52]
10 Pain at POD 3 VAS Show forest plot	6	431	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.47 [‐1.40, 0.47]

10.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.70 [‐0.09, 1.49]
10.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	83	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.40 [‐1.97, 1.17]
10.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	4	264	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.88 [‐1.84, 0.07]
11 Adverse Events Show forest plot	11	675	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.98 [0.28, 3.47]

11.1 Cold vs. Nothing	2	112	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.11 [0.01, 1.86]
11.2 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
11.3 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	2	149	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	4.25 [0.63, 28.57]
11.4 Cold Compression vs. Compression	5	300	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.67 [0.19, 2.32]
11.5 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
12 Transfusion Rate Show forest plot	2	91	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	2.13 [0.04, 109.63]

12.1 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	31	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	20.19 [1.28, 319.17]
12.2 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1	60	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.35 [0.16, 0.77]
13 Analgesic use mg/kg/24hrs Show forest plot	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

13.1 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
14 Pain at POD 1 VAS Show forest plot	6	469	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.22 [‐0.93, 0.49]

14.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.10 [‐0.72, 0.92]
14.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	2	181	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.47 [‐3.55, 0.60]
14.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	3	204	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.12 [‐0.66, 0.89]
15 Analgesic use mg/kg/72hrs Show forest plot	1	88	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.19 [‐0.10, 0.48]

15.1 Cold vs. Nothing	1	88	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.19 [‐0.10, 0.48]
16 Analgesia use total mg/kg Show forest plot	2	90	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐213.80 [‐604.00, 176.39]

16.1 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1	60	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐450.0 [‐781.16, ‐118.84]
16.2 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐46.0 [‐105.42, 13.42]
17 COMBINED Analgesic use Show forest plot	8	516	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.04 [‐0.31, 0.23]

17.1 Cold vs. Nothing	1	88	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.27 [‐0.17, 0.71]
17.2 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.34 [‐0.10, 0.77]
17.3 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	2	114	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.26 [‐0.71, 0.19]
17.4 Cold Compression vs. Compression	3	200	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.31 [‐0.77, 0.15]
17.5 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.46 [‐0.27, 1.18]
18 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of knee flexion POD 1‐6 Show forest plot	6	432	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	5.13 [‐2.06, 12.31]

18.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.70 [‐7.20, 3.80]
18.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	3	212	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	7.76 [‐2.63, 18.14]
18.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	2	136	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	4.80 [‐8.57, 18.16]
19 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of knee flexion POD 7‐14 Show forest plot	2	140	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	12.89 [8.48, 17.30]

19.1 Cold Compression vs. Compression	2	140	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	12.89 [8.48, 17.30]
20 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of flexion at discharge Show forest plot	2	107	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	11.39 [4.13, 18.66]

20.1 Cold vs. Nothing	1	24	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐4.30 [‐37.17, 28.57]
20.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	83	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	12.20 [4.75, 19.65]
21 Range of Motion ‐ degrees of flexion at 3 months Show forest plot	2	61	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.1 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	31	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
21.2 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
22 COMBINED Swelling postoperative at midpatella in mm Show forest plot	4	231	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.25 [‐0.18, 0.68]

22.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.25 [‐0.18, 0.68]
22.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	31	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
22.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	2	116	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
23 Length of Hospital Stay ‐ Days Show forest plot	5	281	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.20 [‐1.55, 1.15]

23.1 Cold vs. Nothing	1	24	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.5 [‐3.65, 0.65]
23.2 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.20 [‐1.19, 0.79]
23.3 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	1	83	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.40 [‐2.16, ‐0.64]
23.4 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1	60	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	2.0 [0.93, 3.07]
23.5 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.20 [‐1.72, 1.32]

Comparison 1. Any cold vs. Any control

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 2. Any cold vs. Any control (Sensitivity analyses excluding studies with bilateral TKRs))

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 COMBINED Blood loss Show forest plot	8	559	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.54 [‐0.98, ‐0.09]

1.1 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.18 [‐0.60, 0.25]
1.2 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	2	181	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.15 [‐0.72, 0.42]
1.3 Cold Compression vs. Compression	4	264	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.01 [‐1.78, ‐0.25]
1.4 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.16 [‐0.88, 0.56]
2 Adverse Events Show forest plot	10	671	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.88 [0.29, 2.64]

2.1 Cold vs. Nothing	2	112	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.11 [0.01, 1.86]
2.2 Cold vs. Compression	1	84	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
2.3 Cold Compression vs. Nothing	2	181	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	3.24 [0.53, 19.72]
2.4 Cold Compression vs. Compression	4	264	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.67 [0.19, 2.32]
2.5 Cold and Continuous Passive Motion vs. Continuous Passive Motion	1	30	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
3 Transfusion Rate Show forest plot	1	60	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.35 [0.16, 0.77]

3.1 Cold Compression vs. Compression	1	60	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.35 [0.16, 0.77]

Comparison 2. Any cold vs. Any control (Sensitivity analyses excluding studies with bilateral TKRs))

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

The Cochrane Library

Scolaris Language Selector Scolaris Language Selector

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet