The tourniquet revisited as an adjunct to lower limb revascularization.

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role and efficacy of the tourniquet in lower limb revascularization. METHODS During a 3-year period, 195 patients underwent 205 infrainguinal reconstruction operations in the lower extremity. These patients underwent bypass with a tourniquet and inflow occlusion (group 1) or bypass without a tourniquet (group 2). The type of infrainguinal reconstruction, tourniquet ischemia time, blood loss, and complications related to tourniquet use were recorded. A subset of patients underwent serial muscle biopsies. Specimens from calf muscle were taken just (1) before application of the tourniquet, (2) before tourniquet release, and (3) once wound closure was initiated. These biopsy specimens were studied by histochemical staining and also analyzed for phosphorylase enzyme, a marker for subcellular ischemia. RESULTS One hundred eleven patients underwent 117 infrainguinal reconstruction procedures in which the tourniquet and inflow occlusion were used. These patients were matched against 84 patients who underwent 88 infrainguinal reconstructions without the use of the tourniquet. Complete hemostatic control in group 1 was obtained in 108 of the procedures (92%). Eight percent of the procedures required minor additional techniques to obtain complete hemostasis; in two instances, the tourniquet was removed because it did not provide hemostasis. Mean tourniquet time was less than 1 hour for all reconstruction groups. There were no instances of neurologic deficit, thrombosis of distal vessels, or vascular injury that was related to the use of a tourniquet. A comparison of the two groups revealed no differences with regard to overall blood loss (P =.63) or duration of operation (P = 0.60), observations that reflect the complexity of the cases rather than the use or nonuse of a tourniquet. When tourniquet control was used, we noted a definite decrease in the time for the distal dissection, because total vascular control with extensive dissection was unnecessary. Histochemical analysis with phosphorylase revealed a conversion of tissue with active enzyme activity to a low level with tourniquet use (P <.05). CONCLUSION The use of a tourniquet for lower limb revascularization is safe and effective and improves visualization of the operative field. Less dissection of the target vessels is required. With a combination of the nonuse of clamps and other occluding devices, we project a decrease in host hyperplastic response that will, in turn, impact favorably on patency rates. The possibility exists that early failure may be prevented by avoiding the application of traumatic forces to diseased and brittle or calcified arteries. In this study, tourniquet time had no impact on overall operative procedural time, although certain phases of the operation were clearly shortened and facilitated, particularly in complex and difficult reconstructions. Histochemical changes found in muscle biopsy specimens did not adversely impact patients clinically, but further investigation is required to elucidate subcellular events.