Tourniquet Use Improves Intraoperative Parameters, Leading to Similar Postoperative Outcomes Compared With No Tourniquet Use in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

Zaid, Hamood H. G.; Hua, Xu; Chen, Binyi; Yang, Quanyuan; Yang, Guo; Chenwei, Nan

doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2022.10.033

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Intraoperative tourniquets are used to reduce bleeding, which results in a clearer operative field of view. Tourniquet use has also been associated with significant reductions in operative times with certain orthopaedic procedures [5]. Despite these benefits, tourniquet use is not without its own risks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Safety of Tourniquet Use in a Trauma Theatre According to the British Orthopaedic Association Guidelines: A Closed Loop Audit

Vayalapra,

Guerero,

Balasubramanian

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionTourniquets are used widely in trauma and orthopaedic surgery to reduce blood loss and facilitate better visualisation of the operative field; however, some complications can result from improper use such as pressure sores, chemical burns, compartment syndrome, and deep vein thrombosis. We audited the use of intraoperative tourniquets in our trauma theatre against the guidance published by the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) in 2021. MethodsThis was a closed-loop audit evaluating 80 trauma operations that utilised tourniquets. In the first cycle, we audited 40 operations (23 upper limbs vs 17 lower limbs) over a period of two months through a review of operation notes and theatre documentation. We presented our findings and implemented changes including the addition of tourniquet use to the operation note template and labels on the tourniquet machines aiding the calculation of tourniquet pressures. A re-audit was then performed involving a further 40 operations (20 upper limbs and 20 lower limbs). Statistical analyses were performed to compare the two cycles. ResultsTourniquet time was on average similar across both audit cycles (60.7 vs 70.0, p = 0.192) with compliance up to standard in 97% of cases. Post-intervention, there was an improvement in the documentation of skin status (37 vs 69%, p = 0.004), tourniquet isolation method (43% vs 74%, p = 0.003), and tourniquet pressure (71% vs 94%, p = 0.003). The difference between tourniquet pressure and systolic blood pressure was on average lower post-intervention for the upper limb (125.9 vs 99.9, p < 0.01) and lower limb operations (154.2 vs 121.7, p < 0.01). Adherence to the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST) guidance with tourniquet pressure improved with intervention (25% vs 75%). ConclusionThe introduction of tourniquet parameters in the operation note template and patient-specific calculation of tourniquet pressures improved the safe use of tourniquets within the trauma theatre.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%