Ali Akbar Mohammadi1, Mohammad Reza Pakyari2, Vahid Dastgerdi2, Seyed Morteza Seyed Jafari1, Mansour Jannati3. 1. Shiraz Burn Research Center, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 2. Shiraz Burn Research Center, Department of Surgery, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 3. Cardiovascular Surgery Ward, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite several studies investigating the pathophysiologic effects of tourniquet usage in extremity surgeries, there are not enough data about these effects in adhesion release surgeries of burn patients. In the light of numerous metabolic changes of burn tissues, we tried to determine whether there are any significant differences in metabolic responses of burn tissues to tourniquet ischemia in comparison to the findings of other studies in non burn tissue responses during tourniquet usage in extremity surgeries. METHODS: From March 2009 to April 2011, eighteen patients who were candidates for performing upper extremity adhesion release surgeries were enrolled. Patients with renal, hepatic, metabolic and any other underlying diseases were excluded from the study. Blood samples for determination of pH, pCO2 and HCO3 were obtained from the occluded hand (as the local response indicator of the body to ischemia) and the other hand too (as the systemic response indicator). The time for blood sampling was just before tourniquet inflation, 30 seconds, one minute, three minutes and five minutes after cuff inflation. RESULTS: Thirty seconds after tourniquet release, a rapid decrease was noticed in pH values (7.38±0.04-->7.21±0.08). This decrease was seen after 60s in the opposite hand (7.38±0.04-->7.27±0.01) and returned to the baseline values after 5 minutes in both hands. The blood PCO2 value in the occluded hand was found to be increased 30s after tourniquet release (34.93±3.96-->50.06±11.78), while this increase was seen after 180s in the opposite hand too (34.93±3.96-->38.98±9.21). HCO3 value increased after 30s (19.79±2.31-->20.62±2.37) in the occluded hand, but this increase was visible after 60s in the opposite hand. We found no significant difference in the response of burn patients to tourniquet ischemia in comparison to non-burn patients. CONCLUSION: There was no extra risk in the application of tourniquet in extremity surgeries of burn patients in comparison to non-burn patients. So current protocols of tourniquet application in non-burn patients can be used for adhesion release surgeries in burn patients without any extra caution.
BACKGROUND: Despite several studies investigating the pathophysiologic effects of tourniquet usage in extremity surgeries, there are not enough data about these effects in adhesion release surgeries of burn patients. In the light of numerous metabolic changes of burn tissues, we tried to determine whether there are any significant differences in metabolic responses of burn tissues to tourniquet ischemia in comparison to the findings of other studies in non burn tissue responses during tourniquet usage in extremity surgeries. METHODS: From March 2009 to April 2011, eighteen patients who were candidates for performing upper extremity adhesion release surgeries were enrolled. Patients with renal, hepatic, metabolic and any other underlying diseases were excluded from the study. Blood samples for determination of pH, pCO2 and HCO3 were obtained from the occluded hand (as the local response indicator of the body to ischemia) and the other hand too (as the systemic response indicator). The time for blood sampling was just before tourniquet inflation, 30 seconds, one minute, three minutes and five minutes after cuff inflation. RESULTS: Thirty seconds after tourniquet release, a rapid decrease was noticed in pH values (7.38±0.04-->7.21±0.08). This decrease was seen after 60s in the opposite hand (7.38±0.04-->7.27±0.01) and returned to the baseline values after 5 minutes in both hands. The blood PCO2 value in the occluded hand was found to be increased 30s after tourniquet release (34.93±3.96-->50.06±11.78), while this increase was seen after 180s in the opposite hand too (34.93±3.96-->38.98±9.21). HCO3 value increased after 30s (19.79±2.31-->20.62±2.37) in the occluded hand, but this increase was visible after 60s in the opposite hand. We found no significant difference in the response of burn patients to tourniquet ischemia in comparison to non-burn patients. CONCLUSION: There was no extra risk in the application of tourniquet in extremity surgeries of burn patients in comparison to non-burn patients. So current protocols of tourniquet application in non-burn patients can be used for adhesion release surgeries in burn patients without any extra caution.
Authors: M Girardis; S Milesi; S Donato; M Raffaelli; A Spasiano; G Antonutto; A Pasqualucci; A Pasetto Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 5.108