The effect of restrictive fluid management on outcomes among geriatric hip fractures: a retrospective cohort study at five level I trauma centers

Author:

Willis Jordan1,Jarvis Stephanie2,Berg Gina M.1,Corrigan Chad1,Madayag Robert3,Reynolds Cassandra4,Tanner Allen5,Marshall Gary6,Palacio Lascano Carlos7,Bar-Or David2

Affiliation:

1. Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, KS

2. Injury Outcomes Network (ION) Research, Englewood, CO

3. Saint Anthony's Hospital, Lakewood, CO

4. Swedish Medical Center, Englewood, CO

5. Penrose Hospital, Colorado Springs, CO

6. Medical City Plano, Plano, TX

7. South Texas Health System McAllen, McAllen, TX

Abstract

Objective: Restrictive fluid management (RFM) for hemodynamically unstable trauma patients has reduced mortality rates. The objective was to determine whether RFM benefits geriatric hip fracture patients, who are usually hemodynamically stable. Design: Retrospective propensity-matched study. Setting: Five Level I trauma centers (January 1, 2018–December 12, 2018). Patients: Geriatric patients (65 years or older) with hip fractures were included in this study. Patients with multiple injuries, nonoperative management, and preoperative blood products were excluded. Intervention: Patients were grouped by fluid volume (normal saline, lactated Ringer, dextrose, electrolytes, and medications) received preoperatively or ≤24 hours of arrival; patients with standard fluid management (SFM) received ≥150 mL and RFM <150 mL of fluids. Main Outcome Measurements: The primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), delayed ambulation (>2 days postoperatively), and mortality. Paired Student t-tests, Wilcoxon paired rank sum tests, and McNemar tests were used; an α value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There were 523 patients (40% RFM, 60% SFM); after matching, there were 95 patients per arm. The matched patients were well-balanced, including no difference in time from arrival to surgery. RFM and SFM patients received a median of 80 mL and 1250 mL of preoperative fluids, respectively (P < 0.001). Postoperative fluid volumes were 1550 versus 2000 mL, respectively, (P = 0.73), and LOSs were similar between the two groups (5 versus 5 days, P = 0.83). Mortality and complications, including acute kidney injuries, were similar. Delayed ambulation rates were similar overall. When stratified by preinjury ambulation status, SFM was associated with delayed ambulation for patients not walking independently before injury (P = 0.01), but RFM was not (P = 0.09). Conclusions: RFM seems to be safe in terms of laboratory results, complications, and disposition. SFM may lead to delayed ambulation for patients who are not walking independently before injury.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

General Medicine

Reference27 articles.

1. Restrictive fluid resuscitation in combination with damage control resuscitation: time for adaptation;Duke;J Trauma Acute Care Surg,2012

2. Permissive hypotension: what's new in fluid resuscitation in the management of hemorrhagic shock?;Karcioglu;J Anesth Intensive Care Med,2018

3. Preoperative fluid restriction for trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock decreases ventilator days;Matsuyama;Acute Med Surg,2018

4. Clinical efficacy of restrictive fluid management in patients with severe traumatic brain injury;Zhao;Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao,2021

5. Restrictive fluid management strategies and outcomes in liver transplantation: a systematic review;Carrier;Can J Anesth,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3