Short- and long term effects of epidural analgesia on morbidity and mortality of esophageal cancer surgery

Epidural anesthesia in esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Esophageal resection, which is the primary treatment of esophageal cancer, is associated with a high risk of morbidity and often leads to significant postoperative pain. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) on pain management and postoperative outcomes in esophageal cancer surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews identification number: CRD42024501967), encompassing studies from the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and LILACS databases. Controlled trials and cohort studies comparing TEA with alternative anesthesia strategies, such as patient-controlled analgesia, were considered for inclusion. The outcomes were pain visual score, use of pain rescue medications, hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, blood loss, extubation time, operation time, postoperative complications, severe complications, catheter-related complications, opioid-related sedation, mortality, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, reintubation, readmission, and vasoactive drug use.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies with 16,146 patients were selected, consisting of 7 controlled trials, 7 retrospective cohorts, and 1 prospective cohort. TEA was associated with significant reductions in pain scores (mean difference [MD]: -0.83 [95% CI, -1.18 to -0.49]), length of stay (MD, -2.3 days [95% CI, -2.78 to -1.73]), extubation time (MD, -0.13 h [95% CI, -0.17 to -0.08]), severe postoperative complications (risk difference [RD], -0.05 patients [95% CI, -0.08 to -0.03]), anastomotic leakage (RD, -0.03 [95% CI, -0.04 to -0.01]), and pulmonary complications (RD, -0.10 patients [95% CI, -0.19 to -0.02]). The operation times were slightly longer in the TEA group (MD, 7.77 min [95% CI, 0.69-14.85]). TEA was associated with a higher risk of catheter-related complications (RD, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.01-0.17]) and higher use of vasoactive drugs (RD, 0.02 [95% CI, 0.00-0.04]). No significant differences were observed for ICU stay, blood loss, mortality, reintubation, readmission, opioid sedation, or use of rescue medication.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight TEA as an effective strategy for enhancing postoperative recovery in patients with esophageal cancer. TEA not only reduces pain scores but also improves postoperative surgical outcomes, including fewer complications, shorter extubation times, and reduced hospital stays.

Trial watch: local anesthetics in cancer therapy

Preclinical evidence indicates potent antitumor properties of local anesthetics. Numerous underlying mechanisms explaining such anticancer effects have been identified, suggesting direct cytotoxic as well as indirect immunemediated effects that together reduce the proliferative, invasive and migratory potential of malignant cells. Although some retrospective and correlative studies support these findings, prospective randomized controlled trials have not yet fully confirmed the antineoplastic activity of local anesthetics, likely due to the intricate methodology required for mitigating confounding factors. This trial watch aims at compiling all published preclinical and clinical research, along with completed and ongoing trials, that explore the potential antitumor effects of local anesthetics.

Regional anesthesia might reduce recurrence and metastasis rates in adult patients with cancers after surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The influence of anesthesia techniques on cancer recurrence and metastasis following oncological surgery is a topic of growing interest. This meta-analysis investigates the potential effects of regional anesthesia (RA), either independently or combined with general anesthesia (GA), on these outcomes.

METHODS

We performed an extensive search across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. The primary outcome was cancer recurrence, while the secondary outcomes were local recurrence and distant metastasis. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by utilizing random-effects models. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for quality assessment of observational studies, the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials (Rob 2.0) was used for randomized controlled trials, and all the outcomes were assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

This study included 32 studies comprising 24,724 cancer patients. RA, either alone or in combination with GA, was significantly associated with reduced cancer recurrence compared to GA alone (OR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.72 to 0.94; p < 0.01). This association remained significant for prostate cancer patients in subgroup analyses (OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.51 to 0.98; p = 0.04) and in the context of epidural anesthesia combined with GA. However, there were no significant associations noted for local recurrence or distant metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides evidence that RA, used alone or adjunctively with GA, is associated with a lower risk of cancer recurrence, particularly in patients with prostate cancer. However, no significant effects were observed on local recurrence or distant metastasis. Further prospective studies should be conducted to clarify this important issue.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in the Receipt of Regional Anesthesia Among Patients Undergoing Thoracic Surgery

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess differences in the use of perioperative regional anesthesia for thoracic surgery based on race and ethnicity.

DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study used data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2015 to 2020. The study authors applied a multivariate logistic regression in which the dependent variable was the primary endpoint (regional versus no regional anesthesia). The primary independent variables were race and ethnicity.

SETTING

Multiple healthcare systems in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were ≥18 years of age and undergoing thoracic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Regional anesthesia.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

On adjusted multivariate analysis, Hispanic patients had lower odds (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.80, p = 0.0003) of receiving regional anesthesia for postoperative pain control compared to non-Hispanic patients. There was no significant difference in the odds of regional anesthesia when comparing racial cohorts (ie, White, Black, Asian, or other).

CONCLUSIONS

There were differences observed in the provision of regional anesthesia for thoracic surgery among ethnic groups. Although the results of this study should not be taken as evidence for healthcare disparities, it could be used to support hypotheses for future studies that aim to investigate causes of disparities and corresponding patient outcomes.

Effects of Different Anesthetic and Analgesic Methods on Cellular Immune Function and Stress Hormone Levels in Patients Undergoing Esophageal Cancer Surgery

The change of perioperative immune function in patients with esophageal cancer is mainly caused by the joint action of surgical trauma and anesthesia. In our study, we aimed to investigate the effects of different anesthetic methods on the changes of T lymphocyte subsets and cytokines in peripheral blood of patients with esophageal cancer surgery. 50 patients with esophageal cancer were divided into the study group and the control group. Among them, the patients in the control group chose intravenous anesthesia and received self-controlled intravenous analgesia after surgery. Patients in the study group chose thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia, undergoing self-controlled epidural analgesia after surgery; serum interleukin-2 (IL-2) and soluble interleukin-2 receptor (sIL-2R) were measured by ELISA. Serum stress hormones GH and sIL-8 were measured by radioimmunoassay. Both groups of patients achieved significant postoperative analgesia, but the VAS score in the study group at the T2-T4 time point was lower than that in the control group. The serum GH concentration in the study group increased at T1 and reached its highest peak at T2, then decreased. The serum IL-8 concentration of the two groups showed a downward trend from T1 to T4. Thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia for postoperative epidural analgesia can relieve the degree of cellular immunosuppression during and after surgery. Moreover, the thoracic epidural block combined with general anesthesia for esophageal cancer surgery and epidural analgesia after surgery for patients are anesthetic and analgesic methods with clinically significant effects. Our research results have a positive effect on the promotion of postoperative rehabilitation in patients with malignant cell tumors.

Effects of Perioperative Epidural Analgesia on Cancer Recurrence and Survival

Surgical resection is the main curative avenue for various cancers. Unfortunately, cancer recurrence following surgery is commonly seen, and typically results in refractory disease and death. Currently, there is no consensus whether perioperative epidural analgesia (EA), including intraoperative and postoperative epidural analgesia, is beneficial or harmful on cancer recurrence and survival. Although controversial, mounting evidence from both clinical and animal studies have reported perioperative EA can improve cancer recurrence and survival via many aspects, including modulating the immune/inflammation response and reducing the use of anesthetic agents like inhalation anesthetics and opioids, which are independent risk factors for cancer recurrence. However, these results depend on the cancer types, cancer staging, patients age, opioids use, and the duration of follow-up. This review will summarize the effects of perioperative EA on the oncological outcomes of patients after cancer surgery.

Anesthetic care influences long-term outcomes: What is the evidence?

Despite advances in cancer therapy surgery remains one of the most important treatments for solid tumors; however, even with the development of better and less invasive surgical techniques, surgery is characterized by the increased risk of tumor metastasis, accelerated growth of pre-existing micrometastasis and cancer recurrence. Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and regional anesthesia have been proposed to improve long-term outcomes after cancer surgery by different mechanisms, including attenuation of the neuroendocrine response, immunosuppression, decreased opioid requirements (opioids promote angiogenesis and tumor growth) and avoidance of volatile inhalational agents. Much of the data that support these ideas originate from laboratory studies, while there is no clear consensus from the retrospective cohort studies to date. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are in progress and may provide a better understanding regarding the role of the anesthesiologist in cancer surgery. The purpose of this review is to summarize the experimental and human data regarding the effect of anesthesia agents and anesthesia techniques on cancer outcomes.

Regional anesthesia prevents cancer recurrence after oncosurgery! What is wrong with the hypothesis?

Several studies have investigated the hypothesis of the efficacy of regional anesthesia (RA) techniques in preventing cancer recurrence when used perioperatively during oncological surgeries. Although theoretically, the association appears beneficial, the patient outcomes after cancer surgeries with or without RA were comparable, that is, the use of RA did not improve patient survival or prevent cancer recurrence after surgery. Another problem with this data is its retrospective nature which makes its interpretation difficult. Moreover, there are a lot of other confounding factors like comorbidities, tumor biology, nosocomial infections, duration of hospital stay, and baseline immunity, which is not comparable, and hence make standardization for a well-designed prospective study difficult. Return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT) involves treatment in the form of radiation or chemotherapy which, if received on time after the planned oncosurgery, could provide a better chance of preventing cancer recurrence and improved survival. However, none of the retrospective studies have correlated cancer recurrence with delay in RIOT or not receiving RIOT as a cause of cancer recurrence. This paper discusses why even a well-designed, prospective trial could possibly never establish the efficacy of RA in preventing cancer recurrence and improving survival due to the complexities involved in a patient undergoing oncosurgery.

The role of regional anaesthesia in the emerging subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia: a state-of-the-art review

Cancer accounts for millions of deaths globally each year, predominantly due to recurrence and metastatic disease. The majority of patients with primary solid organ cancers require surgery, however, some degree of tumour dissemination related to surgery is inevitable. The surgical stress response and associated immunosuppression, pain, inflammation, tissue hypoxia and angiogenesis have all been implicated in promoting tumour survival, proliferation and recurrence. Regional anaesthesia was hypothesised to reduce the surgical stress response and immunosuppression, minimise the need for volatile anaesthesia and reduce pain and opioid requirements, thus mitigating pro-tumour pathways associated with the peri-operative period and improving long-term oncological outcomes. While some retrospective studies suggested an association between regional anaesthesia and reduced cancer recurrence, the first large randomised controlled trial on the effect of anaesthetic technique on cancer outcome found no significant difference between paravertebral regional anaesthesia and volatile anaesthesia with opioid analgesia in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Randomised controlled trials on the long-term oncological outcomes of regional anaesthesia in other tumour types are ongoing. The focus on how peri-operative interventions, especially regional anaesthesia, during cancer resection surgery, may enhance short-term recovery and perhaps influence long-term outcome has spawned the global emergence of the subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia. This review aims to discuss the most recent evidence on the use of regional anaesthesia in cancer surgery and the significance of its role in onco-anaesthesia.

Minimizing postoperative pulmonary complications in thoracic surgery patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Quantification and optimization of perioperative risk factors focusing on anesthesia-related strategies to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after lung and esophageal surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is an increasing amount of multimorbid patients undergoing thoracic surgery due to the demographic development and medical progress in perioperative medicine. Nevertheless, the rate of PPCs after thoracic surgery is still up to 30-50% with a significant influence on patients' outcome. PPCs are ranked first among the leading causes of early mortality after thoracic surgery. Although patients' risk factors are usually barely modifiable, current research focuses on procedural risk factors. From the surgical position, the minimal-invasive approach using video-assisted thoracoscopy and laparoscopy leads to a decreased rate of PPCs. The anesthesiological strategy to reduce the incidence of PPCs after thoracic surgery includes neuroaxial anesthesia, lung-protective ventilation, and goal-directed hemodynamic therapy.

SUMMARY

The main anesthesiological strategies to reduce PPCs after thoracic surgery include the use of epidural anesthesia, lung-protective ventilation: PEEP (positive end-expiratory pressure) of 5-8 mbar, tidal volume of 5 ml/kg BW (body weight) and goal-directed hemodynamics: CI (cardiac index) ≥ 2.5 l/min per m2, MAD (Mean arterial pressure) ≥ 70 mmHg, SVV (stroke volume variation) < 10% with a total amount of perioperative crystalloid fluids ≤ 6 ml/kg BW (body weight) per hour.

Protective effect of dexmedetomidine infusion combined with epidural blockade on postoperative complications after surgery: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Objectives

This prospective, randomized, controlled study aimed to explore the efficacy of dexmedetomidine combined with epidural blockade on postoperative recovery of elderly patients after radical resection for colorectal cancer.

Methods

Ninety-six elderly patients who underwent radical resection for colorectal cancer were randomly divided into the following four groups: dexmedetomidine, epidural blockade (ropivacaine), combined (dexmedetomidine + epidural blockade), and control (0.9% saline). The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Ramsay scores at 48 hours, and time to first activity, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complication rates at 3 months were assessed.

Results

Twelve hours after surgery, Ramsay scores were higher in the combined compared with the control and epidural blockade groups. Twenty-four hours after surgery, MMSE scores were higher in the combined compared with the other groups. The combined group showed the lowest VAS scores except at 48 hours. Time to first activity and length of hospital stay were significantly shorter in the combined compared with the other groups. There was no difference in total postoperative complication rates among the groups.

Conclusions

A combination of intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion and epidural blockade could mitigate pain after surgery, improve cognitive dysfunction in early surgery, and facilitate recovery.

The Impact of Epidural Analgesia on Perioperative Morbidity or Mortality after Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia (EA) is frequently used as an adjuvant to general anesthesia (GA) for improved postoperative analgesia and reduced rates of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications. However, only a few studies have examined EA-GA specifically during open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. The effects of EA-GA specifically during open AAA repair regarding postoperative outcomes are unknown. This study was performed to evaluate postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing open AAA repair with EA-GA versus GA alone.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis for patients undergoing surgery between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016 using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Propensity score matching was used to establish cohorts for analysis. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine significant perioperative outcomes for each anesthesia type. A total of 2,171 patients underwent open AAA repair in our date range; we excluded emergent and ruptured AAA. A total of 2,145 patients were included in our analysis, of whom 653 patients received EA-GA and 1,492 patients received GA only.

RESULTS

Major postoperative outcomes included mortality, pulmonary cardiac and renal complications, infections, thrombosis, and blood transfusion requirement (including Cell-Saver usage). Additional overall outcomes included hospital length of stay, return to the operating room, and readmission. Patients in EA + GA and GA alone groups were comparable regarding demographics, functional status, and comorbidities. Decreased odds of readmission was observed in EA + GA compared with GA (0.49, 95% CI [0.28-0.86]; P = 0.014); and increased odds of receiving a blood transfusion was observed in those who underwent EA + GA (1.63, 95% CI [1.23-2.14]; P = 0.001). No difference was observed between patients who had an AAA repair with EA + GA versus GA alone with regard to mortality, return to operating room, major pulmonary, cardiac, renal, or infectious complications.

CONCLUSIONS

EA + GA was not associated with decreased mortality or decreased rates of major postoperative pulmonary, cardiac, or renal complications. EA + GA was associated with increased transfusion requirements and decreased rates of hospital readmission.

Epidural analgesia and avoidance of blood transfusion are associated with reduced mortality in patients with postoperative pulmonary complications following thoracotomic esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study of 335 patients

Background

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) represent the most frequent complications after esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to identify modifiable risk factors for PPCs and 90-days mortality related to PPCs after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients.

Methods

This is a single center retrospective cohort study of 335 patients suffering from esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy between 1996 and 2014 at a university hospital center. Statistical processing was conducted using univariate and multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis of patient-specific and procedural risk factors for PPCs and mortality.

Results

The incidence of PPCs was 52% (175/335) and the 90-days mortality rate of patients with PPCs was 8% (26/335) in this study cohort. The univariate and multivariate analysis revealed the following independent risk factors for PPCs and its associated mortality. ASA score ≥ 3 was the only independent patient-specific risk factor for the incidence of PPCs and 90-days mortality of patients with an odds ratio for PPCs being 1.7 (1.1–2.6 95% CI) and an odds ratio of 2.6 (1.1–6.2 95% CI) for 90-days mortality. The multivariate approach depicted two independent procedural risk factors including transfusion of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) odds ratio of 1.9 (1.2–3 95% CI) for PPCs and an odds ratio of 5.0 (2.0–12.6 95% CI) for 90-days mortality; absence of thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) revealed the highest odds ratio 2.0 (1.01–3.8 95% CI) for PPCs and an odds ratio of 3.9 (1.6–9.7 95% CI) for 90-days mortality.

Conclusion

In esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy via thoracotomy, epidural analgesia and the avoidance of intraoperative blood transfusion are significantly associated with a reduced 90-days mortality related to PPCs.

The role of regional anesthesia in the propagation of cancer: A comprehensive review

New cancer incidences worldwide will eclipse 18 million in 2019, with nearly 10 million cancer-related deaths. It is estimated that in the United States, almost 40% of individuals will be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime. Surgical resection of primary tumors remains a cornerstone of cancer treatment; however, the surgical process can trigger an immune-suppressing sympathetic response, which promotes tumor growth of any residual cancerous cells post surgery. Regional and local anesthesia have become staples of anesthesia and analgesia during and after surgery. Recently, much evidence in the form of retrospective and prospective studies has come to light regarding the protective, antitumor properties of anesthetic and analgesic agents across a wide variety of cancers and patient demographics. It is believed that by blocking afferent pain signals, the body does not mount the sympathetic response that contributes to the perpetuation of disease after surgical treatment. This review, therefore, investigates these studies as they pertain to the treatment and outcomes of cancers treated surgically to elucidate the role of regional anesthesia in the propagation of cancer.

Influence of perioperative anaesthetic and analgesic interventions on oncological outcomes: a narrative review

Surgery is an important treatment modality for the majority of solid organ cancers. Unfortunately, cancer recurrence following surgery of curative intent is common, and typically results in refractory disease and patient death. Surgery and other perioperative interventions induce a biological state conducive to the survival and growth of residual cancer cells released from the primary tumour intraoperatively, which may influence the risk of a subsequent metastatic disease. Evidence is accumulating that anaesthetic and analgesic interventions could affect many of these pathophysiological processes, influencing risk of cancer recurrence in either a beneficial or detrimental way. Much of this evidence is from experimental in vitro and in vivo models, with clinical evidence largely limited to retrospective observational studies or post hoc analysis of RCTs originally designed to evaluate non-cancer outcomes. This narrative review summarises the current state of evidence regarding the potential effect of perioperative anaesthetic and analgesic interventions on cancer biology and clinical outcomes. Proving a causal link will require data from prospective RCTs with oncological outcomes as primary endpoints, a number of which will report in the coming years. Until then, there is insufficient evidence to recommend any particular anaesthetic or analgesic technique for patients undergoing tumour resection surgery on the basis that it might alter the risk of recurrence or metastasis.

Regional analgesia techniques for pain management in patients admitted to the intensive care unit

Controlling pain should be a priority in the clinical practice of intensive care units (ICUs). Monomodal analgesic approaches, such as the administration of opioids, are widely employed; however, the widespread use of opioids has catastrophic consequences, given their multiple side effects and the development of dependence. Regional analgesia (RA), with single or continuous dosing using neuraxial and peripheral catheters, can play an important role in multimodal analgesia for management of pain in critical care patients. RA provides superior pain control, as compared to systemic treatments, and is associated with a lower rate of side effects. Nevertheless, RA remains underused in ICUs. Many critically ill, post-surgical or traumatically injured patients would benefit from these techniques. For these reasons, we aim to establish a set of potential indications integrating the use of RA in analgesia protocols routinely used in ICUs. We performed a review of literature sources with contrasted evidence levels to present RA techniques and their potential applications in ICU patients.

Effects of thoracic epidural anesthesia/analgesia on the stress response, pain relief, hospital stay, and treatment costs of patients with esophageal carcinoma undergoing thoracic surgery: A single-center, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Appropriate postoperative pain management can improve outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer (EC).

OBJECTIVE

To compare different combinations of anesthesia and analgesia techniques in patients with EC undergoing open thoracotomy.

METHODS

This randomized, controlled, open-label trial enrolled 100 patients with EC (aged 40-65 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] grade I/II) receiving elective surgery at Jiangsu Province Hospital (China) between July 2016 and December 2017. Patients were randomized to 4 groups (n = 25 per group): total intravenous general anesthesia plus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (TIVA/PCIA); TIVA plus patient-controlled epidural analgesia (TIVA/PCEA); thoracic epidural anesthesia with intravenous general anesthesia plus PCIA (TEA-IVA/PCIA); and TEA-IVA/PCEA (TEA-IVA plus PCEA). Primary outcomes were plasma cortisol level (measured at baseline, 2 h after skin incision, surgery completion, and 24 and 48 h post-surgery) and pain (assessed at 24, 48, and 72 hours post-surgery using a visual analog scale). Secondary outcomes included time to first flatus, hospital stay and treatment costs. Postoperative adverse events (AEs) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Baseline and operative characteristics were similar between the 4 groups. Plasma cortisol level increased (P <.05 vs baseline) earlier in the TIVA groups (2 h after skin incision) than in the TEA-IVA groups (24 h after surgery). At 48 hours after surgery, plasma cortisol had returned to baseline levels in the PCEA groups but not in the PCIA groups. VAS pain scores at rest and during coughing were lower in the PCEA groups than in the PCIA groups (P <.05). Compared with the PCIA groups, the PCEA groups had shorter time to first flatus and shorter hospital stay, while use of TEA-IVA lowered the costs of intraoperative anesthesia (P <.05). However, the PCEA groups had a higher incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus.

CONCLUSION

Thoracic epidural anesthesia/analgesia can reduce the stress response, improve postoperative recovery and reduce hospital stay and costs for patients with EC.

Regional anesthesia and analgesia in cancer care: is it time to break the bad news?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is ongoing controversy regarding the tumor-protective effects of regional anesthesia in patients undergoing cancer surgery. Evidence of up-to-date systematic reviews will be presented alongside recent updates on the effects of opioids and local anesthetics.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, the literature regarding the effects of regional anesthesia techniques on cancer recurrence has raised many unanswered questions. Ongoing randomized controlled trials may not be able to shed light on the controversial discussion regarding the tumor protective effects of regional anesthesia because the expected effect size and event rate in those studies may be overstated.Recent more refined animal data, provides no evidence to suggest that opioids promote cancer recurrence or facilitate the development of metastatic disease.In addition, local anesthetics have promising preclinical anticarcinogenic effects that extend beyond their voltage-gated sodium channel blocking properties and could be of therapeutic value.

SUMMARY

Cancer recurrence in patients undergoing surgery remains a global burden. Current evidence suggests that regional techniques, opioid analgesia and local anesthetics in onco-anesthesia may require a tailored individual approach due to the phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity within and between different tumors. The authors surmise that future or ongoing randomized controlled trials regarding regional anesthesia techniques and cancer outcome may not be able to reproduce clear results, as it will be challenging to prove the efficacy of one single intervention (e.g. regional anesthesia) in an otherwise complex multifactorial perioperative oncological setting.

Perioperative benefit and outcome of thoracic epidural in esophageal surgery: a clinical review

Surgery for esophageal cancer is a highly stressful and painful procedure, and a significant amount of analgesics may be required to eliminate perioperative pain and blunt the stress response to surgery. Proper management of postoperative pain has invariably been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative complications and accelerate recovery. Neuraxial analgesic techniques after major thoracic and upper abdominal surgery have long been established to reduce respiratory, cardiovascular, metabolic, inflammatory, and neurohormonal complications.The aim of this review is to evaluate and discuss the relevant clinical benefits and outcome, as well as the possibilities and limits of thoracic epidural anesthesia/analgesia (TEA) in the setting of esophageal resections. A comprehensive search of original articles was conducted investigating relevant literature on MEDLINE, Cochrane reviews, Google Scholar, PubMed, and EMBASE from 1985 to July2017. The relationship between TEA and important endpoints such as the quality of postoperative pain control, postoperative respiratory complications, surgical stress-induced immunosuppression, the overall postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, and major outcomes has been explored and reported. TEA has proven to enable patients to mobilize faster, cooperate comfortably with respiratory physiotherapists and achieve satisfactory postoperative lung functions more rapidly. The superior analgesia provided by thoracic epidurals compared to that from parenteral opioids may decrease the incidence of ineffective cough, atelectasis and pulmonary infections, while the associated sympathetic block has been shown to enhance bowel blood flow, prevent reductions in gastric conduit perfusion, and reduce the duration of ileus. Epidural anesthesia/analgesia is still commonly used for major 'open' esophageal surgery, and the recognized advantages in this setting are soundly established, in particular as regards the early recovery from anesthesia, the quality of postoperative pain control, and the significantly shorter duration of postoperative mechanical ventilation. However, this technique requires specific technical skills for an optimal conduction and is not devoid of risks, complications, and failures.

Effect of postoperative analgesia technique on the prognosis of gastric cancer: a retrospective analysis

Background

Whether regional analgesia techniques have favorable impact on prognosis after cancer surgery is unclear, and existing reports show controversial results. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare recurrence and mortality between patients that received either intravenous (IV) or epidural patient controlled analgesia (PCA) for pain control after curative surgery for gastric cancer.

Materials and methods

Medical records of patients that underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer between November 2005 and December 2010 were reviewed. Identified patients were categorized according to the use of IV or epidural PCA for postoperative analgesia. Demographic and perioperative variables including type of PCA were analyzed by univariate and multiple regression analysis to investigate any association with recurrence and mortality after surgery. Propensity score matching was done to adjust for selection bias.

Results

Of the 3,799 patients included in this analysis, 374 and 3, 425 patients received IV and epidural PCAs, respectively. No difference in recurrence (HR, 1.092; 95% CI 0.859 to 1.388; P = 0.471) or mortality (HR, 0.695; 95% CI 0.429 to 1.125; P = 0.138) was identified between the use of IV and epidural PCA. Propensity score matching also showed no difference in recurrence (HR, 1.098; 95% CI 0.756 to 1.596; P = 0.623) or mortality (HR, 0.855; 95% CI 0.391 to 1.869; P = 0.695) between the two groups.

Conclusions

Postoperative use of epidural analgesia was not found to be associated with reduced recurrence or mortality after curative surgery in gastric cancer patients. This finding needs to be confirmed with prospective studies in the future.

Anesthetic technique and cancer recurrence in oncologic surgery: unraveling the puzzle

Surgery/anesthetic technique-stimulated immunosuppression in the perioperative period might cause an increase in cancer-related mortality. Whether anesthetic technique can affect the outcomes of cancer patients remains inconclusive. This review discusses data from the available literature on anesthetic techniques applied in oncologic surgery, the long-term outcomes of anesthetic technique, and their relation to survival and cancer recurrence. Searches of the PubMed database up to June 30, 2016, were conducted to identify publications with the terms "anesthetic technique and cancer recurrence," "regional anesthesia and cancer recurrence," "local anesthesia and cancer recurrence," "anesthetic technique and immunosuppression," and "anesthetic technique and oncologic surgery." Surgery/anesthesia-stimulated activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) provides immunosuppression through several soluble factors. Volatile anesthetics and opioids suppress cell-mediated immunity (CMI) and promote the proliferation of cancer cells and angiogenesis, whereas propofol does not suppress CMI and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. Regional anesthesia (RA) protects CMI and diminishes the surgical neuroendocrine stress response by blocking afferent neural transmission that stimulates the HPA axis and SNS, decreasing the requirement for opioids and volatile anesthetics and thereby decreasing cancer recurrence. Preclinical and retrospective studies highlight a potential benefit of anesthetic technique in reducing cancer-related mortality and recurrence by attenuating immunosuppression following surgical treatment in patients with specific types of cancer. Several well-planned, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are underway that may provide more conclusive and definitive results regarding the benefits of anesthetic technique on survival in oncologic surgery.

Postoperative pain management after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effective pain management after esophagectomy is essential for patient comfort, early recovery, low surgical morbidity, and short hospitalization. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the best pain management modality focusing on the balance between benefits and risks. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched to identify all studies investigating different pain management modalities after esophagectomy in relation to primary outcomes (postoperative pain scores at 24 and 48 hours, technical failure, and opioid consumption), and secondary outcomes (pulmonary complications, nausea and vomiting, hypotension, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay). Ten studies investigating systemic, epidural, intrathecal, intrapleural and paravertebral analgesia involving 891 patients following esophagectomy were included. No significant differences were found in postoperative pain scores between systemic and epidural analgesia at 24 (mean difference (MD) 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.47-2.24) and 48 hours (MD 0.15; 95%CI -0.60-0.91), nor described for systemic and other regional analgesia. Also, no significant differences in pulmonary complication rates were identified between systemic and epidural analgesia (relative risk (RR) 1.69; 95%CI 0.86-3.29), or between systemic and paravertebral analgesia (RR 1.49; 95%CI 0.31-7.12). Technical failure ranged from 17% to 22% for epidural analgesia. Sample sizes were too small to draw inferences on opioid consumption, the risk of nausea and vomiting, hypotension, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay when comparing the different pain management modalities including systemic, epidural, intrathecal, intrapleural, and paravertebral analgesia. This systematic review and meta-analysis shows no differences in postoperative pain scores or pulmonary complications after esophagectomy between systemic and epidural analgesia, and between systemic and paravertebral analgesia. Further randomized controlled trails are warranted to determine the optimal pain management modality after esophagectomy.

Perioperative Anesthesia Care and Tumor Progression

This narrative review discusses the most recent up-to-date findings focused on the currently available "best clinical practice" regarding perioperative anesthesia care bundle factors and their effect on tumor progression. The main objective is to critically appraise the current literature on local anesthetics, regional outcome studies, opioids, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and their ability to decrease recurrence in patients undergoing cancer surgery. A brief discussion of additional topical perioperative factors relevant to the anesthesiologist including volatile and intravenous anesthetics, perioperative stress and anxiety, nutrition, and immune stimulation is included. The results of several recently published systematic reviews looking at the association between cancer recurrences and regional anesthesia have yielded inconclusive data and provide insufficient evidence regarding a definitive benefit of regional anesthesia. Basic science data suggests an anti tumor effect induced by local anesthetics. New refined animal models show that opioids can safely be used for perioperative pain management. Preliminary evidence suggests that NSAIDs should be an essential part of multimodal analgesia. Volatile anesthetics have been shown to increase tumor formation, whereas preclinical and emerging clinical data from propofol indicate tumor protective qualities. The perioperative period in the cancer patient represents a unique environment where surgically mediated stress response leads to immune suppression. Regional anesthesia techniques when indicated in combination with multimodal analgesia that include NSAIDs, opioids, and local anesthetics to prevent the pathophysiologic effects of pain and neuroendocrine stress response should be viewed as an essential part of balanced anesthesia.

[Perioperative management of transthoracic oesophagectomies : Fundamentals of interdisciplinary care and new approaches to accelerated recovery after surgery]

Locally advanced carcinomas of the oesophagus require multimodal treatment. The core element of curative therapy is transthoracic en bloc oesophagectomy, which is the standard procedure carried out in most specialized centres. Reconstruction of intestinal continuity is usually achieved with a gastric sleeve, which is anastomosed either intrathoracically or cervically to the remaining oesophagus. This thoraco-abdominal operation is associated with significant postoperative morbidity, not least because of a vast array of pre-existing illnesses in the surgical patient. For an optimal outcome, the careful interdisciplinary selection of patients, preoperative risk evaluation and conditioning are essential. The caseload of the centres correlates inversely with the complication rate. The leading surgical complication is anastomotic leakage, which is diagnosed endoscopically and usually treated with the aid of endoscopic procedures. Pulmonary infections are the most frequent non-surgical complication. Thoracic epidural anaesthesia and perfusion-orientated fluid management can reduce the rate of pulmonary complications. Patients are ventilated protecting the lungs and are extubated as early as possible. Oesophagectomies should only be performed in high-volume centres with the close cooperation of surgeons and anaesthesia/intensive care specialists. Programmes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) hold further potential for the patient's quicker postoperative recovery. In this review article the fundamental aspects of the interdisciplinary perioperative management of transthoracic oesophagectomy are described.

Endogenous Opiates and Behavior: 2015

This paper is the thirty-eighth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2015 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia, stress and social status, tolerance and dependence, learning and memory, eating and drinking, drug abuse and alcohol, sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology, mental illness and mood, seizures and neurologic disorders, electrical-related activity and neurophysiology, general activity and locomotion, gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions, cardiovascular responses, respiration and thermoregulation, and immunological responses.

The Relationship Between Regional Anesthesia and Cancer: A Metaanalysis

BACKGROUND

Some studies have suggested using epidural analgesia after cancer surgery to reduce metastasis. This article examines the relationship between regional anesthesia (RA) and cancer metastasis in an array of cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the literature using PubMed and included 67,577 patients across 28 studies in a metaanalysis, evaluating the hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and biochemical recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

We found no benefit to RA as it relates to cancer. The HR was 0.92 for overall survival, 1.06 for recurrence-free survival, and 1.05 for biochemical recurrence-free survival. Despite the overall analysis showing no benefit, we found some benefit when we evaluated only the randomized trials. However, we found no significant benefit of RA when we evaluated the cancers (gastrointestinal, prostate, breast, and ovarian) individually.

CONCLUSION

This metaanalysis shows that RA has no overall survival, recurrence-free survival, or biochemical recurrence-free survival benefit. However, some individual studies have shown significant benefit in terms of cancer recurrence. Further, RA reduces the use of opioids, which has led to some secondary benefits. Further studies are needed to establish the benefits of RA as it relates to cancer.