header advert
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To

In this study patients were randomized between surgeon chosen pressure (control) and an automatically determined tourniquet pressure(study group). Of 112 patients in the study group, 5% failed to obtain an automatic pressure. Of the remainder, the average tourniquet pressure was 198 +/− 20.2 mm Hg compared to 259.6 +/− 4.4 mmHg for the control group (p<0.0001). Of the study group 94 (88.6%) had good to excellent fields compared to the control group where 100 (77.5%) had good to excellent fields (p<0.05). The automatic measurement of limb occlusion pressure results in better operative fields at a lower pressure.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXV | Pages 137 - 137
1 Jun 2012
Manzary M Alijassir FF
Full Access

18 Patients with SCD and 2ndry Osteoarthritis of their hips due to Avascular Necrosis underwent uncemented THA.

There were 12 male and 6 female patients.

Patient had their pre op WOMAC/SF-36/HOOS/and Oxford hip scores recorded preoperatively a well as 3 month, 6months and one year post op.

The outcome scores at one year were significantly better than the pre operative scores

However, when compared to a matched cohort of patients who underwent THA for reasons other than SCD/AVN, e.g. primary OA, rheumatoid arthritis, post traumatic OA, the WOMAC pain score improvement was less.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 102 - 102
1 Mar 2008
Younger A Manzary M Meakin C DeVries G McEwen JA Inkpen K
Full Access

Patients were randomized between surgeon chosen pressure (control) and an automatically determined tourniquet pressure(study) group. Of the study group 94/106 (88.7%) had good to excellent fields compared to the control group where 100/132 (75.8%) had good to excellent fields (p< 0.05). In the study group, 5% failed to obtain an automatic pressure. Of the remainder, the average tourniquet pressure was 198 +/− 20.2 mHg compared to 259.6 +/− 4.4 mmHg for the control group (p< 0.0001). The automatic measurement of limb occlusion pressure resulted in better operative fields at a lower pressure.

To compare the quality of the operative field that results from using an automatic limb occlusion pressure measurement (study group) versus the tourniquet cuff pressure chosen by the surgeon (control group).

A module allowing rapid determination of tourniquet pressure from limb occlusion pressure was attached to a Zimmer ATS tourniquet machine. Using a coin toss, patients were randomized to the study or control groups. All patients underwent elective foot and ankle operations using a wide contoured tourniquet cuff.

Of two hundred and forty-three patients, one hundred and twelve were assigned to the study (automatic) group and one hundred and thirty-two to the control (surgeon selected) group. Six patients (5.4%) failed to obtain a limb occlusion pressure measurement due to anatomical constraints (toe or thigh shape) or equipment problems, leaving one hundred and six in the study group. The average measurement time to determine limb occlusion pressure was 20 +/− 6 seconds. The mean tourniquet pressure for the study group was 198.5 +/−20.2 mmHg, and 259.6 +/−4.4 mmHg for the control group (p< 0.0001). Of the study group 94 (88.7%) had good to excellent fields compared to the control group where one hundred (75.8%) had good to excellent fields (p< 0.05).

An automatically determined tourniquet pressure reduced the tourniquet pressure and improved the incidence of good to excellent operative fields compared to surgeon chosen pressures. The distribution curve of automatically determined tourniquet pressure indicates that 16% of patients will have a failed field if a standard pre-selected pressure of 250 mmHg is always chosen, in part explaining why pre-selected pressure may cause a poorer operative field.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 145 - 145
1 Mar 2008
Manzary M Masri B Garbuz D Greidanus N Duncan C
Full Access

Purpose: To evaluate and compare patient reported quality of life and satisfaction following metal on metal hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty procedures.

Methods: Patients receiving metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and primary total hip arthroplasty were assessed at baseline and followed prospectively with regards to outcomes of quality of life (WOMAC, Oxford-12, SF-12) and satisfaction. Patients receiving resurfacing were matched (1:3) to a cohort of THA on characteristics of age, gender, and comorbidity status. Sample size was selected to evaluate superiority using WOMAC function score with effect size of 0.5, alpha .05, power 80%. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

Results: 222 patients were evaluated with regards to baseline socio-demographic characteristics and quality of life scores(56 resurfacing, 166 THR). Patient cohorts were not different at baseline pre-operatively with regards to age, gender, comorbidity status, WOMAC, Oxford-12, and SF-12 (p> .05). At minimum one year post-op both cohorts reported excellent outcomes. Patients receiving hip resurfacing had superior outcomes with regards to WOMAC function, WOMAC pain, and Oxford-12 hip scores (p< .05). However patients were similar with regards to outcomes of SF-12 mental status and patient-reported satisfaction.

Conclusions: Hip resurfacing and THA patients report excellent outcomes, however, patients receiving hip resurfacing report superior quality of life compared to a matched cohort of THA.