Association Between Anesthetic Dose and Technique and Oncologic Outcomes After Surgical Resection of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

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.

Does the Choice of Anaesthesia Affect Cancer? A Molecular Crosstalk between Theory and Practice

In recent years, there has been an increasing scientific interest in the interaction between anaesthesia and cancer development. Retrospective studies show that the choice of anaesthetics may influence cancer outcome and cancer recurrence; however, these studies show contradictory results. Recently, some large randomized clinical trials have been completed, yet they show no significant effect of anaesthetics on cancer outcomes. In this scoping review, we compiled a body of in vivo and in vitro studies with the goal of evaluating the biological effects of anaesthetics on cancer cells in comparison to clinical effects as described in recent studies. It was found that sevoflurane, propofol, opioids and lidocaine are likely to display direct biological effects on cancer cells; however, significant effects are only found in studies with exposure to high concentrations of anaesthetics and/or during longer exposure times. When compared to clinical data, these differences in exposure and dose-effect relation, as well as tissue selectivity, population selection and unclear anaesthetic dosing protocols might explain the lack of outcome.

Postoperative Long-Term Outcomes and Independent Risk Factors of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients With Propofol versus Sevoflurane Anesthesia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Existing studies have shown that the relationship between anesthetic agents and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) prognosis remains controversial. Therefore, this retrospective cohort study was designed to investigate the effects of propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia on the long-term oncologic outcomes of NSCLC patients.

Methods: We identified 1,778 eligible patients (propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) group, n = 686; sevoflurane-based inhalation anesthesia (INHA) group, n = 1,092) out of 2,388 patients undergoing elective NSCLC surgery from June 2013 to June 2016 in the Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital. The primary endpoints were five-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival. The secondary endpoints were independent risk factors of cancer recurrence or all-cause mortality. The data were analyzed with propensity score matching, Kaplan–Meier survival, and Cox multivariate analyses as appropriate.

Results: After propensity score matching, there were 672 patients in each group. The median follow-up period was 69 months (interquartile range: 68–70 months) for all patients. Five-year overall survival was 75.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 72.4–79.1) in the TIVA group and 71.8% (68.4–75.4) in the INHA group (p = 0.160) (hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70–1.06; p = 0.158), and five-year recurrence-free survival was 68.5% (65.0–72.2) and 62.7% (59.1–66.5 (p = 0.108) (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75–1.08; p = 0.253), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed there were no significant difference in the overall survival or recurrence-free survival between the two groups in each TNM stage of NSCLC. The independent risk factors included age ≥60 years, male, blood transfusion, segmental/wedge resection and pneumonectomy, thoracotomy, postoperative complications, lung adenocarcinoma, TNM stages, high CEA and CYFRA211 levels, and postoperative radiotherapy.

Conclusions: Our data indicated no difference between the propofol-based TIVA and sevoflurane-based INHA in terms of five-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival after NSCLC surgery.