Impact of opioid-free anesthesia on complications after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap surgery: A retrospective cohort study
This study measured the number of complications after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction performed under opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) combined with goal-directed fluid therapy or opioid anesthesia with liberal fluid therapy (OA). This retrospective cohort study consisted...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal Of Plastic Reconstructive And Aesthetic Surgery 2021-03, Vol.74 (3), p.504-511 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | This study measured the number of complications after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction performed under opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) combined with goal-directed fluid therapy or opioid anesthesia with liberal fluid therapy (OA). This retrospective cohort study consisted of 204 patients who underwent DIEP flap reconstruction at AZSint Jan Brugge between April 2014 and March 2019. Primary outcomes were complications, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and the length of hospital stay (LOS). The secondary outcomes were flap failure, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative pain, postoperative opioid consumption, and postoperative skin flap temperature. OFA included a combination of dexmedetomidine, lidocaine, and ketamine without any opioid administered pre- or intraoperatively. OA included a combination of sufentanil and remifentanil. OFA patients received strict goal-directed fluid therapy, whereas OA patients received liberal fluids to maintain perfusion pressure. All patients except 7 (TIVA with remifentanil) received inhalation anesthesia combined with an infusion of propofol. Of the 204 patients, 55 received OFA and 149 received OA. There were no differences in major complications, but fewer minor complications in the OFA group (17.9% vs. 51.4% and P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1748-6815 |