ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2021
Liberal versus Modified Intraoperative Fluid Management in Abdominal-flap Breast Reconstructions. A Clinical Study.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Evaluating Perfusion with Infrared Fluorescent Angiography on Flap Survival in Head and Neck Free Flap Reconstruction.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Moving the needle: a narrative review of enhanced recovery protocols in breast reconstruction.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe outcome of reconstructive microsurgery is influenced by the intraoperative anesthetic regimen. The aim of this study was to compare the impact on the intra- and postoperative complication rates of our modified fluid management (MFM) protocol with a previously used liberal fluid management protocol in abdominal-flap breast reconstructions.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed adverse events related to secondary unilateral abdominal-flap breast reconstructions in two patient cohorts, one with a liberal fluid management protocol and one with a MFM protocol. In the MFM protocol, intravenous fluid resuscitation was restricted and colloid use was minimized. Both noradrenaline and propofol were implemented as standard in the MFM protocol. The primary endpoints were surgical and medical complications, as observed intraoperatively or postoperatively, during or shortly after the hospital stay.
resultsOf the 214 patients included in the study, 172 patients followed the MFM protocol. Prior radiotherapy was more frequent in the MFM protocol. Surgical procedures to achieve venous superdrainage were more often used in the MFM cohort. Intraoperative as well as postoperative complications occurred significantly more frequently in the liberal fluid management cohort and were specifically associated with partial and total flap failures. Prior radiotherapy, additional venous drainage, or choice of inhalation agent did not have an observable impact on outcome.
conclusionsThe incidence of adverse events during and after autologous breast reconstructive procedures was reduced with the introduction of an MFM protocol. Strict intraoperative fluid control combined with norepinephrine and propofol was both beneficial and safe.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.