Landy David C, Mounce Samuel D, Sabatini Franco M, Chapek Jeffrey A, Conley Caitlin E, Duncan Stephen T
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery & Sports Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Arthroplast Today. 2024 Apr 16;27:101364. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101364. eCollection 2024 Jun.
Recovery from total knee arthroplasty remains arduous for some patients, prompting interest in perioperative management. While tourniquet use is not associated with longer-term outcomes, its effect on quadriceps strength in the immediate postoperative window is unknown.
A single-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of 66 patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty from 2019 to 2022 was performed to compare the use of an irrigation-coupled bipolar device (ICBD) and no tourniquet (ICBD group, N = 34) to tourniquet use with no ICBD (tourniquet group, N = 32). Groups were similar with respect to age, sex, and obesity. The primary outcome was quadriceps strength at 2 weeks, measured using a handheld dynamometer and standardized to the contralateral side. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement was measured with the difference from baseline serving as a secondary outcome. Comparisons were performed using the Student's t-test.
Only 28 patients, 14 in each group, had primary outcome data. At 2-weeks, quadriceps strength was higher in the ICBD group compared to the tourniquet group (83% vs 70%), though not statistically significant ( = .16). There was no difference between the ICBD and tourniquet groups in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement changed at 2-weeks (13 vs 10, = .37) or 6-weeks (16 vs 17, = .76).
Tourniquet use was associated with a small but not statistically significant difference in quadriceps strength at 2 weeks that may justify further study given the loss of power here. There can be limitations to conducting randomized controlled trials that are important for early-career investigators to consider and that were magnified due to COVID-related restrictions in the present study, which we discuss.
Level II.
对于一些患者而言,全膝关节置换术后的恢复仍然很艰难,这引发了人们对围手术期管理的关注。虽然使用止血带与长期预后无关,但其对术后即刻股四头肌力量的影响尚不清楚。
进行了一项单中心、双盲、随机对照试验,纳入了2019年至2022年期间接受初次全膝关节置换术的66例患者,比较使用冲洗耦合双极装置(ICBD)且不使用止血带(ICBD组,N = 34)与使用止血带且不使用ICBD(止血带组,N = 32)的情况。两组在年龄、性别和肥胖方面相似。主要结局是术后2周时的股四头肌力量,使用手持测力计测量并与对侧进行标准化。关节置换的膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分以与基线的差值作为次要结局。使用学生t检验进行比较。
只有28例患者(每组14例)有主要结局数据。术后2周时,ICBD组的股四头肌力量高于止血带组(83%对70%),但差异无统计学意义(P = 0.16)。ICBD组和止血带组在术后2周(13对10,P = 0.37)或6周(16对17,P = 0.76)时关节置换的膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分变化无差异。
使用止血带与术后2周时股四头肌力量存在微小但无统计学意义的差异有关,鉴于本研究的效能损失,这可能值得进一步研究。开展随机对照试验可能存在局限性,这是早期研究者需要考虑的重要问题,并且在本研究中由于与新冠疫情相关的限制而被放大,我们对此进行了讨论。
二级。