Tourniquet Use Does Not Affect Rehabilitation, Return to Activities, and Muscle Damage After Arthroscopic Meniscectomy: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Study
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective randomized trial was to examine the effect of tourniquet use on rehabilitation rate, return to work and sport activities, and muscle damage after arthroscopic meniscectomy. METHODS: Eighty patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy were randomly allocated to the use of an inflated (group A, n = 40) or deflated (group B, n = 40) pneumatic tourniquet. Patients with concomitant ligamentous deficiency or grade III and IV chondral lesions were excluded. The primary outcome measures were pain, measured with a visual analog scale (VAS), and knee range of motion (ROM) on days 8 and 15 postoperatively; time required for patients to discontinue the use of crutches; time to return to light activities and moderate sporting activities such as jogging; and serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) levels monitored preoperatively and on days 1, 8, and 15 postoperatively. RESULTS: The 2 groups did not differ in terms of age; male-female ratio; body mass index; and preoperative International Knee Documentation Committee, Tegner, and Lysholm scores. Operative time was not significantly different between groups (mean, 27.5 for group A and 31.2 for group B; P = .83). VAS pain scores and knee ROM were not significant between groups (minimum P = .22). The patients progressed to weight-bearing without crutches within 13.4 and 12.9 days for groups A and B, respectively (P = .9). Return to work and jogging did not differ significantly between groups (minimum P = .34). Serum CPK values were also not significantly different between or within groups during consecutive measurements (P = .3). Tourniquet time did not significantly affect postoperative ROM, VAS pain scores, or serum CPK levels (minimum P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: Tourniquet use for less than 30 minutes during arthroscopic meniscectomy does not affect postoperative pain or return to light work and jogging. In addition, tourniquet-induced muscle damage after arthroscopic meniscectomy, though potentially present locally, is not detectable in the systemic circulation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, prospective randomized trial.
Available from: Sten Rasmussen
- "Tourniquets are frequently applied in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to ensure less intraoperative bleeding and create a bloodless surgical field, thereby potentially reducing surgical time, improving the quality of cementation, and ensuring long-term implant fixation (Bannister and Miles 1988, Rama et al. 2007, Smith and Hing 2010, Tsarouhas et al. 2012). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background and purpose
Tourniquet application is still a common practice in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery despite being associated with several adverse effects. We evaluated the effects of tourniquet use on functional and clinical outcome and on knee range of motion (ROM).
Patients and methods
70 patients who underwent TKA were randomized into a tourniquet group (n = 35) and a non-tourniquet group (n = 35). All operations were performed by the same surgeon and follow-up was for 1 year. Primary outcomes were functional and clinical outcomes, as evaluated by KOOS and knee ROM. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative blood loss, surgical time and visibility, postoperative pain, analgesic consumption, and transfusion requirements.
Patients in the non-tourniquet group showed a better outcome in all KOOS subscores and better early knee ROM from surgery to week 8. No difference was detected at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Postoperative pain and analgesic consumption were less when a tourniquet was not used. Surgical time and visibility were similar between groups. Intraoperative blood loss was greater when not using a tourniquet, but no postoperative transfusions were required.
This study shows that TKA without the use of a tourniquet results in faster recovery in terms of better functional outcome and improved knee ROM. Furthermore, reduced pain and analgesic use were registered and no intraoperative difficulties were encountered.
Acta Orthopaedica 06/2014; 85(4):1-5. DOI:10.3109/17453674.2014.931197 · 2.77 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Lower extremity ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI)-prolonged ischemia and the subsequent restoration of circulation-may result from thrombotic occlusion, embolism, trauma, or tourniquet application in surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of low-molecular-weight dextran sulfate (DXS) on skeletal muscle IRI.
Rats were subjected to 3 h of ischemia and 2 or 24 h of reperfusion. To induce ischemia the femoral artery was clamped and a tourniquet placed under the maintenance of the venous return. DXS was injected systemically 10 min before reperfusion. Muscle and lung tissue samples were analyzed for deposition of immunoglobulin M (IgM), IgG, C1q, C3b/c, fibrin, and expression of vascular endothelial-cadherin and bradykinin receptors b1 and b2.
Antibody deposition in reperfused legs was reduced by DXS after 2 h (P < 0.001, IgM and IgG) and 24 h (P < 0.001, IgM), C3b/c deposition was reduced in muscle and lung tissue (P < 0.001), whereas C1q deposition was reduced only in muscle (P < 0.05). DXS reduced fibrin deposits in contralateral legs after 24 h of reperfusion but did not reduce edema in muscle and lung tissue or improve muscle viability. Bradykinin receptor b1 and vascular endothelial-cadherin expression were increased in lung tissue after 24 h of reperfusion in DXS-treated and non-treated rats but bradykinin receptor b2 was not affected by IRI.
In contrast to studies in myocardial infarction, DXS did not reduce IRI in this model. Neither edema formation nor viability was improved, whereas deposition of complement and coagulation components was significantly reduced. Our data suggest that skeletal muscle IRI may not be caused by the complement or coagulation alone, but the kinin system may play an important role.
Journal of Surgical Research 10/2013; 187(1). DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2013.10.012 · 1.94 Impact Factor
Available from: Andrew Goldberg
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: More than 10 000 ankle arthroscopy procedures are performed in the United Kingdom annually. Tourniquet use is thought to allow improved visibility and reduce operative time. However this is not without risk as it predisposes to neurovascular injury. The purpose of our study was to establish the feasibility of a subsequent larger randomized controlled trial, to test the hypothesis that tourniquet use might be unnecessary in ankle arthroscopy.
We performed a prospective nonrandomized case control study on 63 patients undergoing ankle arthroscopy to assess the feasibility of a randomized control trial comparing tourniquet versus no tourniquet. All patients had a tourniquet placed on the thigh and a standard arthroscopic technique. In 1 group (n = 31) the tourniquet was routinely inflated, whereas in a second group (n = 32) the tourniquet was not inflated. Demographic data, intraoperative fluid pressures, and visibility were recorded, as were any intraoperative or postoperative complications.
There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to duration of operation, maximum intraoperative fluid pressures or visibility, and postoperative complications. In no cases where a tourniquet was not used did the surgeon need to inflate the tourniquet during the case.
Most orthopaedic surgeons continue to use a tourniquet routinely for ankle arthroscopy, presumably on the belief that a clear operative view can be achieved only with a tourniquet. The findings of our feasibility study revealed that ankle arthroscopy was possible without the use of a tourniquet. We propose a randomized clinical trial to determine the best option for patient care.
Therapeutic Level III, comparative series.
12/2013; 35(5). DOI:10.1177/1071100713518504
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.