These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A small difference in recovery between total knee arthroplasty with and without tourniquet use the first 3 months after surgery: a randomized controlled study.
    Author: Alexandersson M, Wang EY, Eriksson S.
    Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc; 2019 Apr; 27(4):1035-1042. PubMed ID: 30328495.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: When a tourniquet is used during surgery on the extremities, the pressure applied to the muscles, nerves and blood vessels can cause neuromuscular damage that contributes to postoperative weakness. The hypothesis was that the rehabilitation-related results would be improved if total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is performed without the use of a tourniquet. METHODS: 81 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee who underwent TKA surgery were randomized to surgery with or without tourniquet. Active flexion and extension of the knee, pain by visual analog scale (VAS), swelling by knee circumference, quadriceps function by straight leg raise, and timed up and go (TUG) test results were measured before and up to 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: ANCOVA revealed no between-groups effect for flexion of the knee at day 3 postsurgery. Compared with the tourniquet group, the nontourniquet group experienced elevated pain at 24 h, with a mean difference of 16.6 mm, p = 0.005. The effect on mobility (TUG test) at 3 months was better in the nontourniquet group, with a mean difference of -1.1 s, p = 0.029. CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis that the rehabilitation-related results would be improved without a tourniquet is not supported by the results. When the results in this study for surgery performed with and without tourniquet are compared, no clear benefit for either procedure was observed, as the more pain exhibited by the nontourniquet group was only evident for a short period and the improved mobility in this group was not at a clinically relevant level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Inconsistent results, Level II.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]