1
|
Tang Y, Tang L, Yao Y, Huang H, Chen B. Effects of anesthesia on long-term survival in cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heliyon 2024; 10:e24791. [PMID: 38318020 PMCID: PMC10839594 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2023] [Revised: 12/08/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 02/07/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yaxing Tang
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Lele Tang
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Yuting Yao
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - He Huang
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Bing Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dubowitz J, Riedel B, Blaas C, Hiller J, Braat S. On the horns of a dilemma: choosing total intravenous anaesthesia or volatile anaesthesia for cancer surgery, an enduring controversy. Br J Anaesth 2024; 132:5-9. [PMID: 37884407 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Accepted: 10/01/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Two methods for administering general anaesthesia are widely used: propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (propofol-TIVA) and inhalation volatile agent-based anaesthesia. Both modalities, which have been standards of care for several decades, boast a robust safety profile. Nevertheless, the potential differential effects of these anaesthetic techniques on immediate, intermediate, and extended postoperative outcomes remain a subject of inquiry. We discuss a recently published longitudinal analysis stemming from a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing sevoflurane-based inhalation anaesthesia with propofol-TIVA in older patients with cancer, which showed a reduced incidence of emergence and postoperative delirium, comparable postoperative complication rates within 30 days after surgery, and comparable long-term survival rates. We undertake an assessment of the trial's methodological strengths and limitations, contextualise its results within the broader scientific evidence, and explore avenues for resolving the extant controversies in anaesthetic choice for cancer surgery. We aim to pave the way for the incorporation of precision medicine paradigms into the evolving landscape of perioperative care for patients with cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Dubowitz
- Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Critical Care, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| | - Bernhard Riedel
- Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Critical Care, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Celia Blaas
- Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Jonathan Hiller
- Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Sabine Braat
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; MISCH (Methods and Implementation Support for Clinical Health) Research Hub, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zhang SH, Jia XY, Wu Q, Jin J, Xu LS, Yang L, Han JG, Zhou QH. The involvement of the gut microbiota in postoperative cognitive dysfunction based on integrated metagenomic and metabolomics analysis. Microbiol Spectr 2023; 11:e0310423. [PMID: 38108273 PMCID: PMC10714990 DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.03104-23] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 10/23/2023] [Indexed: 12/19/2023] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE As the population ages and medical technology advances, anesthesia procedures for elderly patients are becoming more common, leading to an increased prevalence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction. However, the etiology and correlation between the gut microbiota and cognitive dysfunction are poorly understood, and research in this area is limited. In this study, mice with postoperative cognitive dysfunction were found to have reduced levels of fatty acid production and anti-inflammatory flora in the gut, and Bacteroides was associated with increased depression, leading to cognitive dysfunction and depression. Furthermore, more specific microbial species were identified in the disease model, suggesting that modulation of host metabolism through gut microbes may be a potential avenue for preventing postoperative cognitive dysfunction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shi-hua Zhang
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
- College of Life Science and Medicine, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xiao-yu Jia
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
| | - Qing Wu
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
- College of Life Science and Medicine, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jia Jin
- College of Life Science and Medicine, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Long-sheng Xu
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
| | - Lei Yang
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jun-gang Han
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
| | - Qing-he Zhou
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Murphy O, Forget P, Ma D, Buggy DJ. Tumour excisional surgery, anaesthetic-analgesic techniques, and oncologic outcomes: a narrative review. Br J Anaesth 2023; 131:989-1001. [PMID: 37689540 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.07.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2023] [Revised: 07/28/2023] [Accepted: 07/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Cancer is a growing global burden; there were an estimated 18 million new cancer diagnoses worldwide in 2020. Excisional surgery remains one of the main treatments for solid organ tumours in cancer patients and is potentially curative. Cancer- and surgery-induced inflammatory processes can facilitate residual tumour cell survival, growth, and subsequent recurrence. However, it has been hypothesised that anaesthetic and analgesic techniques during surgery might influence the risk of cancer recurrence. This narrative review aims to provide an updated summary of recent observational studies and new randomised controlled clinical trials on whether certain specific anaesthetic and analgesic techniques or perioperative interventions during tumour resection surgery of curative intent materially affect long-term oncologic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Orla Murphy
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mater University Hospital, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Patrice Forget
- Epidemiology Group, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Anaesthesia, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK; Euro-Periscope, The ESA-IC OncoAnaesthesiology Research Group
| | - Daqing Ma
- Euro-Periscope, The ESA-IC OncoAnaesthesiology Research Group; Division of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Donal J Buggy
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mater University Hospital, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Euro-Periscope, The ESA-IC OncoAnaesthesiology Research Group; Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Michard F, Joosten A, Futier E. Intraoperative blood pressure: could less be more? Br J Anaesth 2023; 131:810-812. [PMID: 37778938 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2023] [Revised: 09/05/2023] [Accepted: 09/07/2023] [Indexed: 10/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Retrospective observational studies have reported a significant association between intraoperative hypotension and postoperative morbidity. However, association does not imply causation, and whether preventing intraoperative hypotension can improve patient outcome remains to be demonstrated. In this issue of the British Journal of Anaesthesia, D'Amico and colleagues meta-analysed 10 prospective randomised trials comparing low (≤60 mm Hg) and higher mean arterial pressure targets during anaesthesia and surgery. They did not observe an increase in postoperative morbidity and mortality in the low target group. In contrast, they reported a statistically significant (but not clinically relevant) reduction in postoperative cardiac arrhythmia and hospital length of stay when targeting mean arterial pressure ≤60 mm Hg. These findings suggest that during most surgical cases, intraoperative hypotension is a marker of the severity, frailty, or both rather than a mediator of postoperative complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alexandre Joosten
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Paris-Saclay University, Paul Brousse Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Villejuif, France
| | - Emmanuel Futier
- Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Université Clermont Auvergne, Hopital d'Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Cao SJ, Zhang Y, Zhang YX, Zhao W, Pan LH, Sun XD, Jia Z, Ouyang W, Ye QS, Zhang FX, Guo YQ, Ai YQ, Zhao BJ, Yu JB, Liu ZH, Yin N, Li XY, Ma JH, Li HJ, Wang MR, Sessler DI, Ma D, Wang DX. Delirium in older patients given propofol or sevoflurane anaesthesia for major cancer surgery: a multicentre randomised trial. Br J Anaesth 2023; 131:253-265. [PMID: 37474241 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.04.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2022] [Revised: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 04/14/2023] [Indexed: 07/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delirium is a common and disturbing postoperative complication that might be ameliorated by propofol-based anaesthesia. We therefore tested the primary hypothesis that there is less delirium after propofol-based than after sevoflurane-based anaesthesia within 7 days of major cancer surgery. METHODS This multicentre randomised trial was conducted in 14 tertiary care hospitals in China. Patients aged 65-90 yr undergoing major cancer surgery were randomised to either propofol-based anaesthesia or to sevoflurane-based anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of delirium within 7 postoperative days. RESULTS A total of 1228 subjects were enrolled and randomised, with 1195 subjects included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (mean age 71 yr; 422 [35%] women); one subject died before delirium assessment. Delirium occurred in 8.4% (50/597) of subjects given propofol-based anaesthesia vs 12.4% (74/597) of subjects given sevoflurane-based anaesthesia (relative risk 0.68 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.48-0.95]; P=0.023; adjusted relative risk 0.59 [95% CI: 0.39-0.90]; P=0.014). Delirium reduction mainly occurred on the first day after surgery, with a prevalence of 5.4% (32/597) with propofol anaesthesia vs 10.7% (64/597) with sevoflurane anaesthesia (relative risk 0.50 [95% CI: 0.33-0.75]; P=0.001). Secondary endpoints, including ICU admission, postoperative duration of hospitalisation, major complications within 30 days, cognitive function at 30 days and 3 yr, and safety outcomes, did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS Delirium was a third less common after propofol than sevoflurane anaesthesia in older patients having major cancer surgery. Clinicians might therefore reasonably select propofol-based anaesthesia in patients at high risk of postoperative delirium. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IPR-15006209) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02662257).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuang-Jie Cao
- Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Yue Zhang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Clinical Research Institute, Shenzhen Peking University-The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Medical Center, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
| | - Yu-Xiu Zhang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Wei Zhao
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China
| | - Ling-Hui Pan
- Department of Anesthesiology, Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital, Nanning, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
| | - Xu-De Sun
- Department of Anesthesiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University (Fourth Military Medical University), Xi'an, Shaanxi, China
| | - Zhen Jia
- Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University, Xining, Qinghai, China
| | - Wen Ouyang
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Qing-Shan Ye
- Department of Anesthesiology, People's Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Yinchuan, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China
| | - Fang-Xiang Zhang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China
| | - Yong-Qing Guo
- Department of Anesthesiology, Shanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China
| | - Yan-Qiu Ai
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
| | - Bin-Jiang Zhao
- Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Jian-Bo Yu
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Tianjin Nankai Hospital, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
| | - Zhi-Heng Liu
- Department of Anesthesiology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Health Science Center, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
| | - Ning Yin
- Department of Anesthesiology, Zhongda Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; Department of Anesthesiology, Sir Run Run Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
| | - Xue-Ying Li
- Department of Biostatistics, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Jia-Hui Ma
- Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Hui-Juan Li
- Peking University Clinical Research Institute, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
| | - Mei-Rong Wang
- Peking University Clinical Research Institute, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
| | - Daniel I Sessler
- Department of Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Outcomes Research Consortium, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Daqing Ma
- Division of Anesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK; The Children's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health, Hangzhou, China
| | - Dong-Xin Wang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Outcomes Research Consortium, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|