The outcome of intravenous and inhalation anesthesia after pancreatic cancer resection: a retrospective study

Effects of anesthesia on long-term survival in cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Backgrounds

The association between anesthesia and long-term oncological outcome after cancer surgery remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effect of propofol-based anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on long-term survival in cancer surgery.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library until November 15, 2023. The outcomes included overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). The hazard ratio (HR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated with a random-effects model.

Results

We included forty-two retrospective cohort studies and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 686,923 patients. Propofol-based anesthesia was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.82, 95 % CI:0.76-0.88, P < 0.00001) and RFS (HR = 0.80, 95 % CI:0.73-0.88, P < 0.00001) than inhalation anesthesia after cancer surgery. However, these positive results were only observed in single-center studies (OS: HR = 0.76, 95 % CI:0.68-0.84, P < 0.00001; RFS: HR = 0.76, 95 % CI:0.66-0.87, P < 0.0001), but not in multicenter studies (OS: HR = 0.98, 95 % CI:0.94-1.03, P = 0.51; RFS: HR = 0.95, 95 % CI:0.87-1.04, P = 0.26). The subgroup analysis revealed that propofol-based anesthesia provided OS and RFS advantages in hepatobiliary cancer (OS: HR = 0.58, 95 % CI:0.40-0.86, P = 0.005; RFS: HR = 0.62, 95 % CI:0.44-0.86, P = 0.005), gynecological cancer (OS: HR = 0.52, 95 % CI:0.33-0.81, P = 0.004; RFS: HR = 0.51, 95 % CI:0.36-0.72, P = 0.0001), and osteosarcoma (OS: HR = 0.30, 95 % CI:0.11-0.81, P = 0.02; RFS: HR = 0.32, 95 % CI:0.14-0.75, P = 0.008) surgeries.

Conclusion

Propofol-based anesthesia may be associated with improved OS and RFS than inhalation anesthesia in some cancer surgeries. Considering the inherent weaknesses of retrospective designs and the strong publication bias, our findings should be interpreted with caution. Well-designed multicenter RCTs are still urgent to further confirm these findings.

Propofol-based intravenous anesthesia is associated with improved survival outcomes after major cancer surgery: a nationwide cohort study in South Korea

BACKGROUND

The optimal anesthetic technique for cancer surgery remains a controversial issue. This study aimed to examine whether propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) was associated with survival outcomes after major cancer surgery in South Korea and compare its effectiveness with that of inhalation anesthesia.

METHODS

This nationwide population-based cohort study included adult patients who were admitted to the hospital and underwent major cancer surgery between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. The major cancers included lung, gastric, colorectal, esophageal, small bowel, liver, pancreatic, and bile duct or gallbladder cancers.

RESULTS

A total of 253,003 patients who underwent major cancer surgery were included in the analysis. After propensity score (PS) matching, 115,370 patients (57,685 in each group) were included in the final analysis. In the PS-matched cohort, the TIVA group showed 9% (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91, 95% CI [0.85, 0.98], P = 0.018) and 7% (HR: 0.93, 95% CI [0.89, 0.96], P < 0.001) lower 90-day and one-year mortality rates, respectively, than the inhalation group. In subgroup analyses, the TIVA group showed lower 90-day mortality than the inhalation group in the gastric (HR: 0.86, 95% CI [0.72, 0.97], P = 0.033), colorectal (HR: 0.64, 95% CI [0.56, 0.73], P < 0.001), and pancreatic (HR: 0.76, 95% CI [0.57, 0.94], P = 0.038) cancer surgery groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol-based TIVA is associated with better survival outcomes after major cancer surgeries. Moreover, propofol-based TIVA was beneficial in patients who underwent gastric, colorectal, and pancreatic cancer surgeries.

Outcomes of intravenous and inhalation anesthesia on patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Different anesthetics may have opposite effects on the immune system, thus affecting the prognosis of tumor patients. Cell-mediated immunity forms the primary defense against the invasion of tumor cells, so manipulation of the immune system to produce an enhanced anti-tumor response could be utilized as an adjuvant oncological therapy. Sevoflurane has proinflammatory effects, while propofol, has anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. Therefore, we compared the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with esophageal cancer under total intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia.

METHODS

This study collected the electronic medical records of patients undergoing esophagectomy from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. According to the intraoperative anesthetics, the patients were divided into total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) group or inhalational anesthesia (INHA) group. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) was used to minimize differences. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was established to evaluate the correlation between different anesthesia methods in overall survival and disease-free survival of patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 420 patients with elective esophageal cancer were collected, including 363 patients eligible for study (TIVA, n = 147, INHA, n = 216). After SIPTW there were no significant differences between two groups in overall survival and disease-free survival. However, the adjuvant therapy was statistically significant in improving OS, and the degree of differentiation was correlated with OS and DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, there were no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival between total intravenous anesthesia and inhalational anesthesia in patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.