Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42362895›Full record

Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2026

Optimizing tourniquet pressures in knee arthroscopy: an international survey on current practice and a double-blind randomized trial.

Heber Oliveira Cardoso Filho, Bruno Fajardo do Nascimento, Rodrigo Hohl, Vinicius Novais Rocha, Manoel Carlos Couto de Araujo, Rhaí A Arriel, Gabriel Dias Mendes Andrade, Moacir Marocolo

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Heber Oliveira Cardoso FilhoMedical Faculty, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil. hebercontato31@gmail.com.
Bruno Fajardo do NascimentoDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Rodrigo HohlIntegrated Laboratory of Physiology and Performance (LABIFID), Department of Biophysics and Physiology, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Vinicius Novais RochaDepartment of Morphology, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Manoel Carlos Couto de AraujoDepartment of Morphology, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Rhaí A ArrielIntegrated Laboratory of Physiology and Performance (LABIFID), Department of Biophysics and Physiology, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Gabriel Dias Mendes AndradeMedical Faculty, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Moacir MarocoloIntegrated Laboratory of Physiology and Performance (LABIFID), Department of Biophysics and Physiology, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil. isamjf@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: Pneumatic tourniquets improve surgical visualization during knee arthroscopy, but fixed high pressures may increase postoperative pain. This study investigated whether a minimal effective individualized occlusion pressure (MEIOP), calculated as limb occlusion pressure plus a safety margin, maintains surgical field quality while reducing pain compared to a standardized occlusion pressure (SOP).

methodsA preliminary survey of 79 orthopaedic surgeons identified 350 mmHg as the routine SOP. In a subsequent double-blind randomized clinical trial, patients undergoing elective knee arthroscopy were assigned to SOP (350 mmHg) or MEIOP, defined as Doppler-derived limb occlusion pressure plus a safety margin (mean ≈ 230 mmHg). Outcomes included surgical field quality, postoperative using a visual analog scale (VAS) up to 15 days, overall 15-day pain perception, and analgesic consumption.

resultsBoth groups achieved 100% excellent surgical field ratings. Pain trajectories differed significantly between groups over time (group × time interaction, p = 0.022). The MEIOP group experienced significantly lower pain at discharge (~ 6 h; p = 0.013, d = 1.14) and lower overall 15-day pain perception (p = 0.043, d = 0.89). Analgesic consumption showed a consistent descriptive trend favoring MEIOP throughout follow-up.

conclusionThis proof-of-concept study suggests that individualizing tourniquet pressure using predefined MEIOP protocol preserves satisfactory surgical visualization and is associate with lower postoperative pain compared with a standard high-pressure protocol. This trial was prospectively registered at the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (ReBEC; RBR-4xd6cxm).

Indexed as

ArthroscopyKnee JointPostoperative PainTourniquetsAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPressureSurveys and QuestionnairesAnalgesic consumptionIndividualized occlusion pressureKnee arthroscopyPostoperative painTourniquet pressure

Identifiers

PMID42362895
PMCPMC13562173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.