Surgical hemostasis by pneumatic ankle tourniquet during 3027 podiatric operations

Choosing ankle tourniquets in foot and ankle surgery: Beyond postoperative pain considerations

This editorial critically explores the use of ankle vs thigh tourniquets in foot and ankle surgery based on a recent study that found no significant difference in postoperative pain between the two placement techniques. Despite these findings, we argue for the preferential use of ankle tourniquets, highlighting their potential benefits in reducing venous blood stasis and minimizing soft tissue injury. This approach underscores the importance of considering long-term patient outcomes and vascular health beyond immediate postoperative pain. By integrating study findings with broader clinical considerations, we hereby advocate for a nuanced approach to tourniquet use that prioritizes patient safety and long-term recovery in conjunction with immediate postoperative pain.

Hemostasis Strategies and Recent Advances in Nanomaterials for Hemostasis

The development of materials that effectively stop bleeding and prevent wound adhesion is essential in both military and medical fields. However, traditional hemostasis methods, such as cautery, tourniquets, and gauze, have limitations. In recent years, new nanomaterials have gained popularity in medical and health fields due to their unique microstructural advantages. Compared to traditional materials, nanomaterials offer better adhesion, versatility, and improved bioavailability of traditional medicines. Nanomaterials also possess advantages such as a high degree and stability, self-degradation, fewer side effects, and improved wound healing, which make them ideal for the development of new hemostatic materials. Our review provides an overview of the currently used hemostatic strategies and materials, followed by a review of the cutting-edge nanomaterials for hemostasis, including nanoparticles and nanocomposite hydrogels. The paper also briefly describes the challenges faced by the application of nanomaterials for hemostasis and the prospects for their future development.

Surgical Treatment of Osteochondral Lesions of the Tibial Plafond: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The literature on osteochondral lesions of the tibial plafond (OLTPs) is sparse. The aim of this study was therefore to provide an overview of clinical and radiological outcomes following treatment of OLTPs.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library databases. The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and included all original articles on treatment outcomes for OLTPs. The methodological quality of the articles was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Baseline patient and lesion characteristics were pooled and weighted according to the number of lesions per study. The primary outcome was any clinical or patient-reported outcome measure pooled by treatment method when separable data were available. Secondary outcomes were complications, reoperation rates, radiological outcomes, and sport outcomes.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2,079 articles, of which 10 studies (1 prospective case series, 1 retrospective comparative study, and 8 retrospective case series) with a total of 175 patients were included. The overall methodological quality of the studies was low. All patients were treated surgically; 96% of the lesions were primary cases (i.e., first-time surgery) and 58% were solitary tibial lesions (i.e., no opposing talar lesion). Arthroscopic bone marrow stimulation was the most frequently used treatment strategy (51%), followed by cartilage transplantation (17%), chondrogenesis-inducing techniques (11%), osteochondral transplantation (3%), retrograde drilling (3%), and mixed (i.e., inseparable) treatments (15%). The clinical outcomes of the different surgical therapies were considered to be moderate to good. The pooled postoperative AOFAS (American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society) score for bone marrow stimulation and osteochondral transplantation was 54.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.5 to 85.0) (n = 14) and 85.3 (95% CI, 56 to 100) (n = 3), respectively. Overall, complications and reoperations were rarely reported. The pooled complication and reoperation rates could only be calculated for bone marrow stimulation and were 5% and 7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical interventions for OLTPs appear to yield moderate to good clinical outcomes. Bone marrow stimulation resulted in a moderate AOFAS score. Complications and reintervention rates were found to be low. The current evidence in the literature is limited because of the underreporting of clinical, radiological, and sport data and the heterogenous outcome scores reported.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Understanding and Optimizing Tourniquet Use During Extremity Surgery

Tourniquet use during extremity surgery is commonplace and a relatively safe practice. The surgical team's knowledge of the patient history, proper assessment, and indications and contraindications for and risks of tourniquet use can prevent unwanted outcomes. Exploration of these critical areas reinforces perioperative nurses' awareness and understanding of safe tourniquet use. Additionally, a review of the physiological effect of tourniquets on the skin, the body's response to local compression, the risk of vascular compromise, and the effect of the tourniquet on postoperative pain and swelling provides insight into AORN recommended practice guidelines. This article summarizes the indications and assessments for and risks of tourniquet use for patients during extremity surgery. An understanding of these topics can improve surgical outcomes and promote safe perioperative care.

Reducing the Hypertensive Effects of the Prolonged Surgical Tourniquet Using a Dual-Cuff Strategy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

We evaluated whether moving the "line of crush" from thigh to the calf before onset of tourniquet-mediated hypertension would prevent or diminish it. We also evaluated any change in pain or functional outcome. Twenty adult patients were recruited and randomly assigned to either control or intervention groups. Inclusion criteria: any willing participant >18 years old with foot and/or ankle pathology requiring an operation lasting >90 minutes. Exclusion criteria included contraindication to general anesthesia, peripheral neuropathy affecting lower limbs of any etiology, or chronic pain requiring regular opiate analgesia. The intervention group received a thigh tourniquet for 60 minutes, after which a calf tourniquet was inflated and the thigh tourniquet was deflated. The control group received only a thigh tourniquet throughout surgery. At 90 minutes, the control group had mean arterial pressure of 86.8 mmHg, compared with the intervention group at 76.3 mmHg (p ≤ .014). At end of surgery, the difference had increased further (control 98.1 mmHg, intervention 78.3 mmHg (p ≤ .001). Moving the line of crush during limb tourniquet application prevents development of the hypertensive response. For cases in which a prolonged tourniquet application is required, a dual-tourniquet technique will prevent intraoperative hypertension and may influence long-term pain and function.

American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons® Clinical Consensus Statement: Perioperative Management

A wide range of factors contribute to the complexity of the management plan for an individual patient, and it is the surgeon's responsibility to consider the clinical variables and to guide the patient through the perioperative period. In an effort to address a number of important variables, the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons convened a panel of experts to derive a clinical consensus statement to address selected issues associated with the perioperative management of foot and ankle surgical patients.

Use of peripheral blocks and tourniquets in foot surgery: A survey of Australian orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeons

BACKGROUND

The most common reasons for unplanned admission to the hospital from outpatient surgery have the potential to be minimised or eliminated by peripheral nerve blocks (PNB). Tourniquets are commonly used in elective extremity surgery but it's use is mostly guided by personal preferences and does no correlate with the existing literature. Our aim was to explore the current practice of PNB and tourniquet use by foot and ankle surgeons in Australia.

METHODS

The Australian Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgery Society (AOFAS) annual meeting was held in Adelaide in 2011. Members were asked to complete an electronic survey on their current use of peripheral nerve blocks and tourniquets. Two specific elective case scenarios were included for comment, one pertaining to forefoot pathology, the other hindfoot pathology.

RESULTS

Twenty-three AOFAS members replied to the survey, an overall response rate of 76.6%. Of these, only two surgeons did not use ankle blocks in elective surgery and none were prepared to operate without a tourniquet. Most Australian foot and ankle surgeons were reluctant to use local anaesthetic techniques without an accompanying GA.

CONCLUSIONS

While the literature suggests that GA may add to complications without any benefit for the procedure and that distally based tourniquets may add benefit, these are not the favoured techniques in Australian foot and ankle surgeons.

Tourniquet in surgery of the limbs: a review of history, types and complications

CONTEXT

A tourniquet is a device that is used frequently in most orthopaedic surgeries but this routine device can lead to serious complications so we decided to review and declare it for safe instruction and use.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched the word "tourniquet" in PubMed and Google and reviewed all full text English articles and abstracts of non-English articles. In addition, we read all the reference pages of articles to find the new references.

RESULTS

The use of tourniquet in orthopedic surgery can lead to serious but rare complications that can be prevented by its correct knowledge and use.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, there is not enough evidence to discontinue the routine uses of tourniquets.

Clinical use of a new tourniquet system for foot and ankle surgery

This study reports the results of the clinical use of a new tourniquet system for surgery of foot and ankle that can determine tourniquet pressure in synchrony with systolic blood pressure (SBP). We prospectively applied additional pressure of 100 mmHg based on the SBP recorded before the skin incision in 100 consecutive procedures. There were 34 open reduction internal fixation procedures, 26 lateral colateral ligament repair or reconstruction, 16 Achilles tendon repairs, nine arthroscopic procedures such as removal of loose body or accessory bone and synovectomy, seven corrective osteotomy and eight others such as removal of tumour, ankle fusion, and bone graft. The average initial tourniquet pressure was 211 mmHg. The average maximum SBP change during surgery was 28 mmHg. All cases maintained an excellent operative field without measurable bleeding and there were no postoperative complications. Fifty-five cases had a lower intra-operative SBP than the initial value. Since a tourniquet should be applied at the lowest pressure possible for maintaining a bloodless surgical field, the new system appears to be practical and reasonable, as compared to conventional tourniquets, which maintain the initial pressure.

Tourniquet cuff pressure: The gulf between science and practice

Tourniquet use is effective in producing a bloodless field. It is recommended that the least effective pressures be used to minimize tissue microstructure and biochemical damage from tourniquet application. When applied at the thigh, the minimum effective tourniquet pressure is 90 to 100 mm Hg above systolic BP, and in a normotensive, nonobese patient, pressure of 250 mm Hg is sufficient. Similarly, an arm tourniquet pressure of 200 mm Hg is recommended. The purpose of this survey was to assess the tourniquet pressures used by orthopaedic surgeons, both academic and community based, and their familiarity with associated literature.

MATERIALS

A Website-based survey was distributed to a random sample of academic and community-based surgeons. Respondents were asked the upper and lower-extremity tourniquet pressures they routinely use. They were asked if they were able to cite or were aware of literature to support their answer. They were also asked to specify their practice setting and years in practice. Results were statistically analyzed utilizing Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS

A total of 199 survey responses were collected. Out of these, 151 (76%) were complete for the lower extremity, and 141 (71%) were complete for upper extremity. The average years in practice were 12.6 years (range, 1-30). The median LE pressure was 300 mm (range, 150-400), and the median UE pressure was 250 mm (range, 150-300). Less than 20% of respondents routinely used pressures of 250 mm or less for the lower extremity. For upper extremity, only 11.3% used pressures at or below 200 mm. Surgeons in academic practice were more likely to use lower tourniquet pressures, and less likely to choose "don't know" as the option for literature support, but the difference was not statistically significant. Although 60% of respondents thought that they were aware of literature supporting their answers, only 25% of these for the lower extremity and 11% for the upper used the correct pressures.

CONCLUSION

This survey demonstrates the existing gulf between tourniquet use and supporting literature. Tourniquet use is not benign and the correct pressure usage allows the least morbidity. We hope this survey will raise awareness of the correct tourniquet pressures and change practice patterns based on "that's how we have always done it".

Survey of tourniquet use in orthopaedic foot and ankle surgery

BACKGROUND

Tourniquet technique varies among foot and ankle surgeons, and to establish a standard practice guideline the current standard of care should be examined.

METHODS

One hundred and forty responses were received after 253 surveys were mailed to American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) members, concerning type of tourniquets, location, and pressures used.

RESULTS

Cuff pressures most commonly used were 301 to 350 mmHg for thigh cuffs (49% of thigh cuff users) and 201 to 250 mmHG for calf and ankle cuffs (52% of calf cuff users, 66% of ankle cuff users). A substantial number of foot and ankle surgeons who use calf and ankle cuffs frequently use pressures above 250 mmHg (41% of calf cuff users, 19% of ankle cuff users). Only 9% use limb occlusion pressure when determining cuff pressure.

CONCLUSION

Based on the existing evidence-based literature these pressures may be higher than necessary for many patients, and increased adoption of optimal pressure setting techniques as reported in the literature may help reduce tourniquet pressures used and risk of tourniquet injury. Respondents reported experiencing or hearing reports of breakthrough bleeding, nerve injury, and skin injuries under the cuff.

Acceptability of ankle tourniquet use in midfoot and forefoot surgery: audit of 1000 cases

BACKGROUND

While use of a thigh tourniquet with general anesthesia is widely accepted, use of an ankle tourniquet in the awake patient is more controversial. In particular, it is not clear how long patients tolerate this device or what the consequences are of intraoperative tourniquet pain.

METHOD

A prospective audit was done of 1000 patients undergoing midfoot and forefoot surgery using an ankle block. We examined the intraoperative problems associated with the use of an ankle tourniquet, particularly the role and consequences of intraoperative tourniquet pain. Risk factors for tourniquet pain were statistically examined, and patient acceptance was gauged through followup questions.

RESULTS

With correct application and the option of sedation, 3.1% of patients complained of tourniquet pain. In 0.4% of patients tourniquet pain necessitated a conversion to general anesthesia. A significant association was found between tourniquet pain and both age and tourniquet time. We found that for patients younger than 70 years of age, the tourniquet can be applied comfortably for up to 30 minutes in over 97%. For each 11 minutes beyond this, another 1% of patients reported tourniquet pain. However, patients 70 years or older had an average 3.5 times increase in tourniquet pain. In this age group the tourniquet can be applied comfortably for up to 30 min in 91%. For each 3.2 minutes beyond this, another 1% reported tourniquet pain. When questioned, 97.2% of our patients reported that they would have surgery again with an ankle tourniquet.

CONCLUSIONS

Our audit shows that with correct application and the option of sedation the ankle tourniquet is well tolerated by most patients. However, clinicians need to be mindful that patients 70 years of age or older are at greater risk of tourniquet pain and that in all patients the risk of tourniquet pain gradually increases when application times exceed 30 min.

Evaluation of the Esmark bandage as a tourniquet for forefoot surgery

PURPOSE

Although used routinely as a tourniquet in forefoot surgery, the pressure under an Esmark bandage has had little evaluation, and its use has been discouraged by some. The purpose of this study was to quantitate the pressure generated by an elastic bandage in a clinical setting and compare several different types of commercially available Esmark bandages.

METHODS

Five foot and ankle fellowship program directors and five foot and ankle fellowship trained surgeons comprised the volunteer group which performed clinical simulations with a 6-inch Esmark bandage at the ankle level. Variables were then added, including different padding, a change in the position of the surgeon, and a 4-inch Esmark bandage. A questionnaire on their use of an elastic bandage in practice was also administered. Differences in pressure between different types of available 6-inch Esmark bandages were also compared. Pressure measurements were recorded by a pressure monitor device.

RESULTS

The average pressure of the 10 surgeons' trials for three wraps with a tuck was 222 mm Hg (range, 146-319 mm Hg); four wraps with a tuck averaged 288 mm Hg (range, 202-405 mm Hg). No significant difference was seen between the standard technique and when the surgeon stood (three wraps and a tuck, p =.26; four wraps and a tuck, p =.33), when cast padding was used (three wraps and a tuck, p =.62; four wraps and a tuck, p =.74), or a 4-inch Esmark bandage (three wraps and a tuck, p >.99; four wraps and a tuck, p =.34). There was a significant decrease in the pressure when a blue towel was used as padding (three wraps and a tuck, p =.05; four wraps and a tuck, p =.04). Pressures obtained by the 10 different volunteers were uniform with little variation (three wraps and a tuck = 222 +/- 61 mm Hg; four wraps and a tuck = 288 +/- 68 mm Hg). No significant difference was seen between the different types of 6-inch Esmark bandages (p >.05). The combined complication rate for the 10 surgeons is estimated to be less than 0.1%.

CONCLUSION

The practice of using a 6-inch Esmark bandage as a tourniquet at the ankle level for forefoot procedures is a safe and reliable method. Although pressures between surgeons vary, the average pressure is in an effective yet safe range. Recommendations for the application of the Esmark bandage as a tourniquet are given.

Survey of tourniquet use in podiatric surgery

Tourniquet use in foot and ankle surgery is common practice; however, the technique varies among foot and ankle surgeons and there are no standard guidelines. To analyze trends in foot and ankle tourniquet use, the authors conducted an e-mail survey. One thousand six hundred sixty-five foot and ankle surgeons were sent a tourniquet-use survey via e-mail, across Canada and the United States. Nineteen percent of the recipients completed and returned the surveys. Eleven (3.4%) rarely or never use a tourniquet and 8 (2.5%) use an Esmarch bandage tourniquet at the ankle. Most use pneumatic ankle cuffs (92% use, 27% use exclusively); many also use thigh cuffs (69%) and some also use calf cuffs (15%). Most thigh-cuff users (62%) experience problems with cuff fit sometimes or often. All but 3 respondents exsanguinate the limb before tourniquet inflation. Specific devices used for exsanguination varied among surgeons. Most commonly used tourniquet pressures range from </=200 to 350 mm Hg at the ankle and </=200 to >/=351 mm Hg for the thigh (64% use pressures between 301 and 350 mm Hg). Only 7% of respondents consider limb occlusion pressure when selecting tourniquet cuff pressure. Based on published studies of limb occlusion pressures, these ranges suggest that some of the more common pressure settings may be higher than necessary for many patients. Vascular disease or previous bypass (91%) and deep vein thrombosis (83%) were the most commonly listed contraindications to tourniquet use. Approximately 10% of respondents have either experienced or learned of skin and nerve injuries secondary to lower extremity tourniquet use at any level. The varied responses show a lack of overall consensus on tourniquet pressure settings. Guidelines for optimizing cuff pressure and technique should be established to minimize the risk of complications.

Tourniquet safety in lower leg applications

PURPOSE

To reduce the chance of injury due to pneumatic tourniquet use, the minimum cuff pressure required to maintain a bloodless field should be used. The purpose of this study was to find out if Limb Occlusion Pressure (LOP--the cuff pressure required to occlude arterial flow) is lower with a wide contoured cuff than with a standard width cylindrical cuff at the calf, if cuff pressures based on measured LOP will be lower than the typical 250 mmHg used in lower leg cuffs, and if a new automatic LOP measurement method gives the same results as the standard Doppler stethoscope method.

SAMPLE

16 adult volunteers were tested in a controlled laboratory setting, and 53 clinical cases were reviewed at two centers.

DESIGN

Repeated measures comparison of LOP on volunteers with the two different cuffs and measurement methods, and review of clinical cases.

RESULTS

LOP was lower with the wide cuff on all volunteers (mean reduction 20 mmHg, SD 8.6, range 5-35, p < 0.001). The average difference of 1.2 mmHg between Doppler and automatic LOP readings was not significant (p = 0.43). Based on the volunteer results, using LOP plus a safety margin of 40, 60, or 80 mmHg (for LOP < 130, 131-190, or 190+ respectively) with a standard width cylindrical cuff will lead to an average cuff pressure of 223 mmHg (range 170-299, SD 36), 11% lower than typical practice and up to 80 mmHg (32%) lower on some patients. Using a wide, contoured cuff should further reduce cuff pressures to an average of 195 mmHg (range 160-280, SD 33), 22% lower than typical practice and a reduction of up to 90 mmHg (36%). At two clinics, the wide cuff maintained a bloodless field in 48 out of 53 cases (91%) when used at 200 mmHg.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a wide, contoured cuff at the calf should reduce required cuff pressures compared to a standard cuff. Setting cuff pressure based on LOP should further reduce cuff pressures for most patients compared to typically used pressures. With continued development, the new automatic method may become a viable alternative to the Doppler method and may make LOP measurement more practical in the clinical setting.

Pneumatic ankle tourniquets: physiological factors related to minimal arterial occlusion pressure

This study investigates several physiological measurements for their correlation to the minimal arterial occlusion pressure using the pneumatic ankle tourniquet. Blood pressure (brachial), height, weight, body fat percentage, ankle circumference, and leg circumference measurements were collected from 50 normotensive healthy subjects. Ankle brachial index (ABI) was also compared. A pneumatic ankle tourniquet was applied to the right ankle and inflated until Doppler insonation confirmed that arterial occlusion had occurred. Mean arterial occlusion pressure was 161.7 mm Hg (N = 50, Nmales = 33, Nfemales = 17), and statistically less than 170 mm Hg (p < .05). The authors present a data model to predict the lowest necessary ankle tourniquet pressure for this study group. Forward stepwise linear regression (critical significance = .01) yields two variables, ankle brachial index and systolic blood pressure, which are used to predict occlusion pressure in this study group.

Retrospective assessment of antibiotic and tourniquet use in an ambulatory surgery center

In this study, 459 lower extremity surgeries were evaluated to assess and improve the quality of patient care at the Carnegie Surgery Center, Cleveland, Ohio. Two aspects of surgery were studied: the antibiotic usage and tourniquet application. The authors analyzed the rate of infection and the number of tourniquet complications that resulted from the surgeries. The infection rate was 0.65%, and there were no tourniquet complications. Using the information learned from the study and reviewing pertinent literature, recommendations were made to further enhance patient care.