Abstract
Aim: Tourniquets are commonly used in ambulatory upper-limb surgery, but are still associated with complications, malfunction, and pain. We evaluated the S-MART™ device for blood-flow management compared to a conventional pneumatic tourniquet. Methods: Sixty patients were assigned to study and control groups, where arterial occlusion was achieved by S-MART™ device and pneumatic tourniquet, respectively. Results: S-MART™ was safe, but more difficult to apply and caused more pain. Conclusion: The S-MART™ proved to be a fast and safe tool, but induced a compression discomfort. The costs of using this disposable product should be contemplated when considering its addition to day-care operating room armamentarium.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Ambulatory Surgery |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| State | Published - Apr 2008 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Arterial occlusion
- Carpal tunnel release
- Complication
- Esmarch
- Evaluation
- Exsanguination
- Hand
- Pain
- Tourniquet
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Surgery
- MedicalSurgical
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine