In any experimental study of shock, simplicity and uniformity of production are admittedly essential factors. We agree with Allen1 and Moon2 that the tourniquet technic probably meets these requirements more easily than any other method, such as trauma to a hindlimb, burning, intestinal manipulation or hemorrhage. Nevertheless, the serious criticisms of the influence of anesthesia and of nervous impulses in the production of experimental shock have been applicable to practically all tourniquet methods heretofore used. It seemed desirable in our study of the problem to overcome these objections as much as possible before attempting to gather evidence either for or against any of the three currently accepted theories as to the cause of shock: (a) local loss of circulating fluid (Blalpck and Duncan,3 Parsons and Phemister,4 Wilson and Roome5 and Mann and Mann and Essex6); (b) absorption of a toxic substance from injured areas
CHESS S, CHESS D, COLE WH. EXPERIMENTAL TOURNIQUET SHOCK WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE TOXIC FACTOR: A METHOD OF PRODUCTION ELIMINATING THE INFLUENCE OF GENERAL ANESTHESIA AND NERVOUS IMPULSES. Arch Surg. 1944;49(3):147–155. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1944.01230020153001
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: