Clinical outcomes of intraoperative dopamine infusion for hypotensive patients during breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps.

BACKGROUND: Dopamine has a favorable therapeutic profile but has not been widely used to treat hypotension during microvascular breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes in patients who received dopamine during breast reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) free flaps and compare them with patients who did not receive dopamine. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was performed for patients who underwent breast reconstruction with DIEP free flaps between October 2018 and March 2020. Patient demographics, comorbidities, fluid balance, hospital stay, and adverse outcomes were compared between patients who received at least 1 h of dopamine (DA) and patients who did not receive dopamine (ND). Subgroup analyses were performed for bilateral procedures and patients who received dopamine. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients in the DA group and 43 patients in the ND group met the inclusion criteria. There were no flap-related complications. Patients who had dopamine initiated to maintain blood pressures had a higher total volume of intravenous fluid (ND:3.81L vs. DA:5.04L, p = 0.005). However, DA patients exhibited decreased fluid requirements (ND:839 mL/h vs. DA:479 mL/h, p = 0.004) and increased urine output (ND:98.0 mL/h vs. DA:340 mL/h, p = <0.001) once dopamine was initiated. Intraoperative urine output (ND:1.37 L vs. DA:3.48 L, p < 0.001) and rate (ND:1.9 ml/kg/h vs. DA:3.7 ml/kg/h, p < 0.001) were increased in the DA group. The fluid balance of patients undergoing bilateral procedures was closer to neutral for patients who received dopamine (ND:+3.43 L vs. DA:+2.26 L, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Dopamine is safe to use in microvascular breast reconstruction. It may be beneficial for hemodynamically labile patients by stabilizing blood pressure and facilitating a neutral fluid balance.

Risk Factors for Infection After Distal Radius Fracture Fixation: Analysis of Impact on Cost of Care.

Purpose: Infection after distal radius fracture fixation can be a devastating complication, leading to potential hardware removal, prolonged antibiotic courses, multiple office visits, and increased costs. This study aimed to identify potential risk factors for infectious complications after distal radius fracture fixation and assess the impacts on cost. Methods: This study used the PearlDiver national database, encompassing 53 million unique patients from January 1, 2010, to March 31, 2020. The cohort included patients undergoing distal radius fracture fixation. The endpoint was postoperative infection within 180 days of fixation. Two-sample t test was used to compare rates of infection between open and percutaneous fracture fixation techniques. A propensity-matched cohort was created using patient age, gender, and open fracture. Logistic regression analyses defined independent risk factors for developing a postoperative infection among all patients and within the matched cohorts. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare costs of care with and without infection. Results: The database included 87,169 patients who underwent distal radius fracture fixation. Postoperative infections were identified in 781 patients (0.9%). There was a significant difference in rates of postoperative infection with percutaneous fixation (1.3%) versus open fixation (0.8%). Logistic regression analysis identified male gender, open fracture, lung disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, liver disease, obesity, and tobacco to be independent risk factors for developing a postoperative infection. Logistic regression analysis of the propensity-matched cohorts identified tobacco use as a significant risk factor. The average cost of care for patients undergoing fracture fixation without an infection was $6,383, versus $23,355 for those with an infection, which was significantly different. Conclusions: Multiple risk factors for postoperative infection were identified. Cost is significantly increased after postoperative infection, by almost 4-fold. Attempts to correct or optimize modifiable risk factors may lead to substantial cost savings, and potentially decreased rates of infection. Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic III.