JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Coleman, M. M. Articles by Hendler, A. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Coleman, M. M. Articles by Hendler, A. L.

---

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MANAGEMENT

Quantitative Comparison of Leakage Under the Tourniquet in Forearm Versus Conventional Intravenous Regional Anesthesia

Margaret M. Coleman, FFARCSI^*, Philip W. Peng, FRCPC^*, Joan M. Regan, FFARCSI^*, Vincent W. S. Chan, FRCPC^*, and Aaron L. Hendler, FRCPC

*Department of Anesthesia and Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Toronto, The Toronto Hospital, Toronto, Canada

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Philip Peng, Department of Anesthesia, The Toronto Hospital, Western Division, 399 Bathurst St., Toronto M5T 2S8, Canada. Address e-mail to ppeng{at}torhosp.toronto.on.ca

We compared the quantitative leakage between forearm and conventional IV regional anesthesia (IVRA). Forearm IVRA remains unpopular because of the theoretical risk of local anesthetic leakage through the interosseous vessels. IVRA was simulated on the forearm or arm during two separate, randomized sessions using a double tourniquet in 14 volunteers. A radiolabeled substance, DISIDA (99^m Tc-disofenin) with a structure similar to lidocaine, was injected instead of local anesthetic. Volumes of 0.4 mL/kg (maximum 25 mL), were used for forearm IVRA and 0.6 mL/kg (maximum 45 mL) for conventional IVRA. A camera recorded radioactivity levels in the limb distal to the tourniquet every 30 s while the tourniquet was inflated (25 min) and for 20 min postdeflation. The leakage of radiolabeled substance during inflation was similar in both groups, 6% ± 12% (mean ± SD) from the forearm and 10% ± 20% from the upper arm. After deflation, mean loss of radioactivity was higher in conventional IVRA, 70% ± 7% vs 57% ± 11% and 82% ± 5% vs 69% ± 11% at 3 and 20 min, respectively (P < 0.001). We conclude that forearm IVRA results in tourniquet leakage comparable to conventional IVRA and is potentially safer because the required dose of local anesthetic is smaller.

Implications: Using a tourniquet on the forearm for IV regional anesthesia does not increase the risk of drug leakage. This is potentially a safer technique compared with conventional IV regional anesthesia because a much smaller dose of local anesthetic is required.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. S. Reuben, R. B. Steinberg, H. Maciolek, and P. Manikantan An Evaluation of the Analgesic Efficacy of Intravenous Regional Anesthesia with Lidocaine and Ketorolac Using a Forearm Versus Upper Arm Tourniquet Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2002; 95(2): 457 - 460. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999