Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2015.42.2.164
Retrospective Analysis of the One-per-Million Tumescent Technique in Post-Burn Hand Deformity Surgeries
Background The use of a tourniquet in hand surgery is generally accepted as necessary to create a clear visualization of the operative field. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of one-per-million tumescent solution (1:1,000,000 epinephrine concentration) in creating a bloodless operative field in post-burn hand deformity surgeries performed without a tourniquet.
Methods This retrospective observational study was conducted on a series of 12 patients with post-burn hand deformities who underwent surgery between February 2013 and January 2014. A total of 29 operative fields were recorded. The one-per-million tumescent solution was used for hemostatis instead of a tourniquet. The clarity of the operative field, volume of solution injected, duration of surgery, scar thickness and density, and functional outcomes at least three months after the surgery were observed. The relationship of scar thickness and density with the clarity of the operative field was analyzed with the chi-square test.
Results Of the 29 operative fields in which the one-per-million tumescent technique was used, 48.2% were totally bloodless, 44.8% had minimal bleeding, and 6.9% had an acceptable level of bleeding. Both scar thickness and density were shown to have a significant relationship with operative field clarity (P<0.05).
Conclusions The one-per-million tumescent technique is effective in facilitating post-burn hand deformity surgeries involving meticulous, multiple, and lengthy procedures by creating a relatively clear operative field without the use of a tourniquet. Although scar thickness and density are associated with the clarity of the operative field, this technique can be considered safe and effective in creating a clear operative field.
This article contains supplemental Tables S1, S2, and Video S1.
Supplemental Table S1
- Supplementary material
Summary of categories definition
Supplemental data can be found at: https://e-aps.org/src/sm/aps-42-164-s001.pdf
Supplemental Table S2
- Supplementary material
Operative field distribution based on the thickness and density of scar
Supplemental data can be found at: https://e-aps.org/src/sm/aps-42-164-s002.pdf
Publication History
Received: 16 October 2014
Accepted: 01 December 2014
Article published online:
05 May 2022
© 2015. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
REFERENCES
- 1 Karia RA. Hemostasis and tourniquet. Oper Tech Sports Med 2011; 19: 224-230
- 2 Flatt AE. Tourniquet time in hand surgery. Arch Surg 1972; 104: 190-192
- 3 Robertson RD, Bond P, Wallace B. et al. The tumescent technique to significantly reduce blood loss during burn surgery. Burns 2001; 27: 835-838
- 4 Cartotto R, Musgrave MA, Beveridge M. et al. Minimizing blood loss in burn surgery. J Trauma 2000; 49: 1034-1039
- 5 van der Veer WM, Bloemen MC, Ulrich MM. et al. Potential cellular and molecular causes of hypertrophic scar formation. Burns 2009; 35: 15-29
- 6 Oragui E, Parsons A, White T. et al. Tourniquet use in upper limb surgery. Hand (N Y) 2011; 6: 165-173
- 7 Avci G, Akan M, Yildirim S. et al. Digital neurovascular compression due to a forgotten tourniquet. Hand Surg 2003; 8: 133-136
- 8 Odinsson A, Finsen V. Tourniquet use and its complications in Norway. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88: 1090-1092
- 9 Denkler K. A comprehensive review of epinephrine in the finger: to do or not to do. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108: 114-124
- 10 Wilhelmi BJ, Blackwell SJ, Miller JH. et al. Do not use epinephrine in digital blocks: myth or truth?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107: 393-397
- 11 Denkler K. Dupuytren's fasciectomies in 60 consecutive digits using lidocaine with epinephrine and no tourniquet. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 115: 802-810
- 12 Chowdhry S, Seidenstricker L, Cooney DS. et al. Do not use epinephrine in digital blocks: myth or truth? Part II. A retrospective review of 1111 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 126: 2031-2034
- 13 Thomson CJ, Lalonde DH, Denkler KA. et al. A critical look at the evidence for and against elective epinephrine use in the finger. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 119: 260-266
- 14 Lalonde DH, Lalonde JF. Discussion. Do not use epinephrine in digital blocks: myth or truth? Part II. A retrospective review of 1111 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 126: 2035-2036
- 15 Prasetyono TO, Biben JA. One-per-mil tumescent technique for upper extremity surgeries: broadening the indication. J Hand Surg Am 2014; 39: 3-12.e7
- 16 Prasetyono TH, Saputra DA, Astriana W. One-per-mil tumescent technique for bone and joint surgery in hand. Hand(N Y) 2014; 9: 1-8
- 17 Sullivan T, Smith J, Kermode J. et al. Rating the burn scar. J Burn Care Rehabil 1990; 11: 256-260
- 18 Schwanholt C, Greenhalgh DG, Warden GD. A comparison of full-thickness versus split-thickness autografts for the coverage of deep palm burns in the very young pediatric patient. J Burn Care Rehabil 1993; 14: 29-33
- 19 Schwarz RJ. Management of postburn contractures of the upper extremity. J Burn Care Res 2007; 28: 212-219
- 20 Prasetyono TO. Tourniquet-free hand surgery using the one-per-mil tumescent technique. Arch Plast Surg 2013; 40: 129-133
- 21 Cox C, Yao J. Tourniquet usage in upper extremity surgery. J Hand Surg Am 2010; 35: 1360-1361