Volatile versus Total Intravenous Anesthesia for Cancer Prognosis in Patients Having Digestive Cancer Surgery

Recurrence-free survival after curative resection of non-small cell lung cancer between inhalational gas anesthesia and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia: a multicenter, randomized, clinical trial (GAS TIVA trial): protocol description

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the primary treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but microscopic residual disease may be unavoidable. Preclinical studies have shown that volatile anesthetics might suppress host immunity and promote a pro-malignant environment that supports cancer cell proliferation, migration, and angiogenesis, whereas propofol may preserve cell-mediated immunity and inhibit tumor angiogenesis. However, clinical evidence that propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) can reduce tumor recurrence after curative resection remains inconsistent due to the retrospective observational nature of previous studies. Therefore, we will test the hypothesis that the recurrence-free survival (RFS) after curative resection of NSCLC is higher in patients who received TIVA than volatile anesthetics (GAS) in this multicenter randomized trial.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomized trial will enroll patients at 22 international sites, subject to study registration, institutional review board approval, and patient written informed consent. Eligible patients are adult patients undergoing lung resection surgery with curative intent for NSCLC. Exclusion criteria will be contraindications to study drugs, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status IV or higher, or preexisting distant metastasis or malignant tumor in other organs. At each study site, enrolled subjects will be randomly allocated into the TIVA and GAS groups with a 1:1 ratio. This pragmatic trial does not standardize any aspect of patient care. However, potential confounders will be balanced between the study arms. The primary outcome will be RFS. Secondary outcomes will be overall survival and complications within postoperative 7 days. Enrollment of 5384 patients will provide 80% power to detect a 3% treatment effect (hazard ratio of 0.83) at alpha 0.05 for RFS at 3 years.

DISCUSSION

Confirmation of the study hypothesis would demonstrate that a relatively minor and low-cost alteration in anesthetic management has the potential to reduce cancer recurrence risk in NSCLC, an ultimately fatal complication. Rejection of the hypothesis would end the ongoing debate about the relationship between cancer recurrence and anesthetic management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was prospectively registered at the Clinical trials ( https://clinicaltrials.gov , NCT06330038, principal investigator: Hyun Joo Ahn; date of first public release: March 25, 2024) before the recruitment of the first participant.

Major liver resections, perioperative issues and posthepatectomy liver failure: A comprehensive update for the anesthesiologist

Significant advances in surgical techniques and relevant medium- and long-term outcomes over the past two decades have led to a substantial expansion in the indications for major liver resections. To support these outstanding results and to reduce perioperative complications, anesthesiologists must address and master key perioperative issues (preoperative assessment, proactive intraoperative anesthesia strategies, and implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery approach). Intensive care unit monitoring immediately following liver surgery remains a subject of active and often unresolved debate. Among postoperative complications, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) occurs in different grades of severity (A-C) and frequency (9%-30%), and it is the main cause of 90-d postoperative mortality. PHLF, recently redefined with pragmatic clinical criteria and perioperative scores, can be predicted, prevented, or anticipated. This review highlights: (1) The systemic consequences of surgical manipulations anesthesiologists must respond to or prevent, to positively impact PHLF (a proactive approach); and (2) the maximal intensive treatment of PHLF, including artificial options, mainly based, so far, on Acute Liver Failure treatment(s), to buy time waiting for the recovery of the native liver or, when appropriate and in very selected cases, toward liver transplant. Such a clinical context requires a strong commitment to surgeons, anesthesiologists, and intensivists to work together, for a fruitful collaboration in a mandatory clinical continuum.

The Surgical Stress Response and Anesthesia: A Narrative Review

The human physiological response "to stress" includes all metabolic and hormonal changes produced by a traumatic event at the micro or macro cellular levels. The main goal of the body's first response to trauma is to keep physiological homeostasis. The perioperative non-specific adaptation response can sometimes be detrimental and can produce systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), characterized by hypermetabolism and hyper catabolism. We performed a narrative review consisting of a description of the surgical stress response's categories of changes (neurohormonal and immunological response) followed by reviewing methods found in published studies to modulate the surgical stress response perioperatively. We described various preoperative measures cited in the literature as lowering the burden of surgical trauma. This article revises the anesthetic drugs and techniques that have an impact on the surgical stress response and proven immune-modulatory effects. We also tried to name present knowledge gaps requiring future research. Our review concludes that proper preoperative measures, adequate general anesthetics, multimodal analgesia, early postoperative mobilization, and early enteral nutrition can decrease the stress response to surgery and ease patient recovery. Anesthetics and analgesics used during the perioperative period may modulate the innate and adaptive immune system and inflammatory system, with a consecutive impact on cancer recurrence and long-term outcomes.

Effect of different anaesthetic techniques on the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer after resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The effect of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) and inhalation anaesthesia (IA) on the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer after resection is controversial. This study aimed to explore the effects of different anaesthesia methods on the postoperative prognosis of colorectal cancer.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant literature from each database's inception until 18 November 2023. The literature topic was to compare the effects of TIVA and IA on the prognosis of patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection.

Results

Six studies were selected for meta-analysis. The studies involved 111043 patients, with a trial size of 1001-88184 people. A statistically significant difference was observed in the overall survival (OS) between colorectal cancer patients administered TIVA and IA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.99), but none in recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90-1.08). In the subgroup analysis of OS, no statistically significant difference was observed between colorectal cancer patients administered TIVA and IA in Asia (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.57-1.05), and not in Europe (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93-1.06). Regarding tumour location, no significant association was found between TIVA and IA in the colon, rectum and colorectum ((HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.38-1.28), (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.08) and (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93-1.06), respectively).

Conclusion

OS differed significantly between patients administered TIVA and IA when undergoing colorectal cancer resection, but no difference was observed in RFS. The prognostic effects of TIVA and IA differed.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023453185, identifier CRD42023453185.

Anesthesia and cancer recurrence: a narrative review

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. With the increasingly aging population, the number of emerging cancer cases is expected to increase markedly in the foreseeable future. Surgical resection with adjuvant therapy is the best available option for the potential cure of many solid tumors; thus, approximately 80% of patients with cancer undergo at least one surgical procedure during their disease. Agents used in general anesthesia can modulate cytokine release, transcription factors, and/or oncogenes. This can affect host immunity and the capability of cancer cells to survive and migrate, not only during surgery but for up to several weeks after surgery. However, it remains unknown whether exposure to anesthetic agents affects cancer recurrence or metastasis. This review explores the current literature to explain whether and how the choice of anesthetic and perioperative medication affect cancer surgery outcomes.

Association between postinduction hypotension and postoperative mortality: a single-centre retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

We aimed to elucidate whether postinduction hypotension (PIH), defined as hypotension between anesthesia induction and skin incision, and intraoperative hypotension (IOH) are associated with postoperative mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with an ASA Physical Status I-IV who underwent noncardiac and nonobstetric surgery under general anesthesia between 2015 and 2021 at Nagoya City University Hospital. The primary and secondary outcomes were 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality, respectively. We calculated four hypotensive indices (with time proportion of the area under the threshold being the primary exposure variable) to evaluate the association between hypotension (defined as a mean blood pressure < 65 mm Hg) and mortality using multivariable logistic regression models. We used propensity score matching and RUSBoost (random under-sampling and boosting), a machine-learning model for imbalanced data, for sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Postinduction hypotension and IOH were observed in 82% and 84% of patients, respectively. The 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality rates were 0.4% (52/14,210) and 1.0% (138/13,334), respectively. Postinduction hypotension was not associated with 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 1.13; P = 0.60) and 90-day mortality (aOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.07; P = 0.82). Conversely, IOH was associated with 30-day mortality (aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.27; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (aOR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.19; P < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses supported the association of IOH but not PIH with postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSION

Despite limitations, including power and residual confounding, postoperative mortality was associated with IOH but not with PIH.

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.

The association between intraoperative anesthesia methods used during gastric cancer surgery and long-term mortality: A retrospective observational study using a Japanese claims database

PURPOSE

Various basic and clinical studies have investigated the association between the types of anesthetic agents and prognosis. However, the results have varied among studies and remain controversial. In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether the risk of all-cause mortality differs between inhaled or intravenous anesthetics in patients with gastric cancer undergoing gastrectomy.

METHODS

Using a Japanese nationwide insurance claims database, we analyzed patients who underwent gastrectomy under general anesthesia for gastric cancer between January 2005 and September 2019. Postoperative outcomes were compared between two groups: those who received inhaled anesthetics (Sevoflurane, Isoflurane, or Desflurane) and those who received intravenous anesthetics (propofol), using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. The primary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

Among 2671 eligible patients, 2105 were in the inhaled anesthetic group, and 566 were in the intravenous anesthetic group. The median (interquartile range) age was 58 (51-63) years, and 1979 (74.1%) were men. The median follow-up period was 795 days. We identified 56 (2.7%) and 16 (2.8%) deaths during the follow-up period in the inhaled and intravenous anesthetic use groups, respectively. There was no difference in postoperative overall survival between the two groups (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.70; P = 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant difference in the postoperative risks of overall survival between inhaled and intravenous anesthesia in patients with gastric cancer undergoing gastrectomy.

Randomized controlled trial of the effect of general anesthetics on postoperative recovery after minimally invasive nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

General anesthetic techniques can affect postoperative recovery. We compared the effect of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and desflurane anesthesia on postoperative recovery.

METHODS

In this randomized trial, 150 patients undergoing robot-assisted or laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cancer were randomly allocated to either the TIVA or desflurane anesthesia (DES) group. Postoperative recovery was evaluated using the Korean version of the Quality of Recovery-15 questionnaire (QoR-15K) at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h postoperatively. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) was performed to analyze longitudinal QoR-15K data. Fentanyl consumption, pain severity, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and quality of life three weeks after discharge were also compared.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed for 70 patients in each group. The TIVA group showed significantly higher QoR-15K scores at 24 and 48 h postoperatively (24 h: DES, 96 [77, 109] vs. TIVA, 104 [82, 117], median difference 8 [95% CI: 1, 15], P = 0.029; 48 h: 110 [95, 128] vs. 125 [109, 130], median difference 8 [95% CI: 1, 15], P = 0.022), however not at 72 h (P = 0.400). The GEE revealed significant effects of group (adjusted mean difference 6.2, 95% CI: 0.39, 12.1, P = 0.037) and time (P < 0.001) on postoperative QoR-15K scores without group-time interaction (P = 0.051). However, there were no significant differences in other outcomes, except for fentanyl consumption, within the first 24 h postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol-based TIVA showed only a transient improvement in postoperative recovery than desflurane anesthesia, without significant differences in other outcomes.

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.

Impact of prognostic nutritional index change on prognosis after colorectal cancer surgery under propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia

BACKGROUND

The alteration of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) or the utilization of distinct anesthesia strategies has been linked to the prognosis of various cancer types, but the existing evidence is limited and inconclusive, particularly for colorectal cancer (CRC). Our objective was to evaluate the association between PNI change and progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with CRC surgery after propofol-based or sevoflurane-based anesthesia.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 414 patients with CRC who underwent surgical resection. Among them, 165 patients received propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA-P), while 249 patients received sevoflurane-based inhalation anesthesia (IA-S). The PNI change (ΔPNI) was calculated by subtracting the pre-surgery PNI from the post-surgery PNI, and patients were categorized into high (≥ -2.25) and low (< -2.25) ΔPNI groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were employed to evaluate the effects of the two anesthesia methods, ΔPNI, and their potential interaction on PFS and OS.

RESULTS

The median duration of follow-up was 35.9 months (interquartile range: 18-60 months). The five-year OS rates were 63.0% in the TIVA-P group and 59.8% in the IA-S group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-1.35; p = 0.864), while the five-year PFS rates were 55.8% and 51.0% (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.68-1.26; p = 0.614), respectively. In comparison to patients in the low ΔPNI group, those in the high ΔPNI group exhibited a favorable association with both OS (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.40-0.76; p < 0.001) and PFS (HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.43-0.79; p < 0.001). Stratified analysis based on ΔPNI revealed significant protective effects in the propofol-treated participants within the high ΔPNI group, whereas such effects were not observed in the low ΔPNI group, for both OS (p for interaction = 0.004) and PFS (p for interaction = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data revealed that among patients who underwent CRC surgery, those treated with TIVA-P exhibited superior survival outcomes compared to those who received IA-S, particularly among individuals with a high degree of PNI change.

Tumour excisional surgery, anaesthetic-analgesic techniques, and oncologic outcomes: a narrative review

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.

Impact of Propofol-based Total Intravenous Anesthesia Versus Inhalation Anesthesia on Long-term Survival After Cancer Surgery in a Nationwide Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To compare the impact of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) versus inhalational anesthesia (IA) on the overall survival following cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND

The association between intraoperative anesthetics and patients' long-term outcomes following cancer surgery remains controversial.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used nationwide data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. Adult patients who underwent cancer resection surgery (breast, gastric, lung, liver, kidney, colorectal, pancreatic, esophageal, and bladder cancer) under general anesthesia between January 2007 and December 2016 were included. Patients were divided into propofol-based TIVA or IA groups according to the type of anesthesia received. A total of 312,985 patients (37,063 in the propofol-based TIVA group and 275,922 patients in the IA group) were eligible for analysis. The primary outcome was the comparison of overall survival following surgery between the groups in each cancer type. We compared the all-cause mortality between the 2 groups, stratified by cancer type using time-dependent Cox regression after propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting. We further examined the comparison of overall survival in a meta-analysis using data from our study and previously published data comparing propofol-based TIVA with IA after cancer surgery.

RESULTS

The number of deaths in the propofol-based TIVA and IA groups was 5037 (13.6%) and 45,904 (16.6%), respectively; the median (interquartile range) follow-up duration was 1192 (637-2011) days. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed no significant association between the type of general anesthesia and overall survival after cancer surgery in the weighted cohort for each cancer type (all P >0.05) and for total population [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-1.04]. In a meta-analysis, single-center studies showed higher overall survival in the TIVA group than in the IA group (pooled adjusted HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.47-0.91, P =0.01), while multicenter studies showed insignificant pooled adjusted HRs (pooled adjusted HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.82-1.33, P =0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no association between the type of general anesthesia used during cancer surgery and postoperative overall, 1-, and 5-year survival.

Influence of the Anesthetic Technique on Circulating Extracellular Vesicles in Bladder Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy: A Prospective, Randomized Trial

Anesthetics have been shown to alter tumor progression and seem to influence surgical cancer outcome. Circulating extracellular vesicles as mediators of intercellular communication are involved in cancer progression and may be influenced by anesthetics. In this prospective, randomized study, effects of anesthetics on extracellular vesicles and associated micro-RNAs in bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy were tested. Extracellular vesicles from 51 patients at four perioperative time points receiving Propofol or Sevoflurane were extracted with polymer-based methods and quantified with a nanoparticle-tracking analysis. Vesicle-associated micro-RNAs were analyzed with a real-time polymerase chain reaction using array cards and single assays for tumor-associated miR-21-5p, miR-15a-5p, miR-17-5p and miR-451a. Plasma extracellular vesicle concentration (suture: fold change (fc) in Propofol at 4.1 ± 3.9 vs. Sevoflurane at 0.8 ± 0.5; p = 0.003) and associated miRNAs increased significantly (+30% post induction, +9% 30 Min surgery) in the Propofol group. Tumor-associated miRNAs increased during surgery in both groups (fc in miR-21-5p: 24.3 ± 10.2, p = 0.029; fc in miR-15a-5p: 9.7 ± 3.8, p = 0.027; fc in miR-17-5p: 5.4 ± 1.7, p = 0.014), whereas antitumor miR-451a increased in the Propofol group only (fc: 2.5 ± 0.6 vs. 1.0 ± 0.2; p = 0.022). Anesthetics influence extracellular vesicles and associated micro-RNAs of bladder cancer patients during surgery. Increased expression of antitumor micro-RNA may be an explanatory approach for decreased tumor cell viability after Propofol.

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.

Total intravenous anesthesia versus inhalation anesthesia: how do outcomes compare?

RECENT FINDINGS

Surgical procedures that involve general anesthesia are performed with either volatile anesthetics or propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia. Both techniques are safe and provide appropriate conditions for surgery. Despite being a well established anesthetic, the use of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) remains low. Possible explanations include the perceived increase risk of awareness, lack of target controlled infusion devices, increased turnover time for device set up and individual preference.

SUMMARY

There are some scenarios where patients could potentially benefit from propofol-based TIVA rather than a volatile anesthetic (e.g. postoperative nausea and vomiting) and some other clinical scenarios where the use of propofol-based anesthesia remains controversial since the strength of the evidence remains low.

PURPOSE

In this review we will summarize the clinical evidence comparing the effect of propofol-based TIVA and volatile anesthetic on postoperative outcomes such as postoperative nausea and vomiting, postoperative pain, quality of recovery, postoperative cognitive dysfunction and cancer outcomes.

Long-term survival in older patients given propofol or sevoflurane anaesthesia for major cancer surgery: follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Experimental evidence indicates that i.v. anaesthesia might reduce cancer recurrence compared with volatile anaesthesia, but clinical information is observational only. We therefore tested the primary hypothesis that propofol-based anaesthesia improves survival over 3 or more years after potentially curative major cancer surgery.

METHODS

This was a long-term follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial in 14 tertiary hospitals in China. We enrolled 1228 patients aged 65-90 yr who were scheduled for major cancer surgery. They were randomised to either propofol-based i.v. anaesthesia or to sevoflurane-based inhalational anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was overall survival after surgery. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free and event-free survival.

RESULTS

Amongst subjects randomised, 1195 (mean age 72 yr; 773 [65%] male) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. At the end of follow-up (median 43 months), there were 188 deaths amongst 598 patients (31%) assigned to propofol-based anaesthesia compared with 175 deaths amongst 597 patients (29%) assigned to sevoflurane-based anaesthesia; adjusted hazard ratio 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-1.26; P=0.834. Recurrence-free survival was 223/598 (37%) in patients given propofol anaesthesia vs 206/597 (35%) given sevoflurane anaesthesia; adjusted hazard ratio 1.07; 95% CI: 0.89-1.30; P=0.465. Event-free survival was 294/598 (49%) in patients given propofol anaesthesia vs 274/597 (46%) given sevoflurane anaesthesia; adjusted hazard ratio 1.09; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.29; P=0.298.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival after major cancer surgery was similar with i.v. and volatile anaesthesia. Propofol-based iv. anaesthesia should not be used for cancer surgery with the expectation that it will improve overall or cancer-specific survival.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

ChiCTR-IPR-15006209; NCT02660411.

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.

Ciprofol: A Novel Alternative to Propofol in Clinical Intravenous Anesthesia?

Ciprofol is a novel compound that was independently developed in China. According to the Chinese product instructions approved by the China National Medical Products Administration and the information of official website, indications for ciprofol include sedation and anesthesia during the surgical/procedure of nontracheal intubation, induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, and sedation during intensive care. Ciprofol is a short-acting intravenous sedative based on the structural modification of propofol. Ciprofol has high efficacy, good selectivity, and fewer adverse reactions, indicating good clinical application potential. A series of clinical studies have been conducted to evaluate the sedative effect of ciprofol in various procedures and settings, including gastroscopy and colonoscopy, fiber-optic bronchoscopy, general anesthesia in elective surgeries, and mechanical ventilation in intensive care units. This review summarizes the chemical structure, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetic properties of ciprofol. We also assessed the efficacy and safety of ciprofol by synthesizing the relevant clinical trial data.

Transcriptome analysis reveals the differential inflammatory effects between propofol and sevoflurane during lung cancer resection: a randomized pilot study

BACKGROUND

Propofol and sevoflurane are two commonly used perioperative anesthetics. Some studies have found that these anesthetic drugs affect tumorigenesis. Previous studies have mostly focused on in vitro experiments, and the specimens collected were mainly peripheral body fluids, lacking direct evidence of the impact of anesthetic drugs on human tissues. This study aimed to elucidate the effects of propofol and sevoflurane on lung cancer using next-generation sequencing through an in vivo experiment.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to a group receiving either propofol or sevoflurane during surgery. Then, the patients' tumor and paired normal samples were collected and sequenced by next-generation sequencing. Differentially expressed genes (DEG) were analyzed by two statistical models, followed by cluster analysis, PCA, Gene Ontology, and KEGG pathway analysis. Candidate genes were confirmed by qRT-PCR.

RESULTS

The demographic data of the two study groups were not statistically significant. Through single-factor model analysis, 810 DEG in the propofol group and 508 DEG in the sevoflurane group were obtained. To better reflect the differential effects between propofol and sevoflurane while reducing the false-positive DEG, we used multifactor model analysis, which resulted in 124 DEG. In PCA and cluster analysis, four groups (propofol cancer group, propofol normal group, sevoflurane cancer group, sevoflurane normal group) were separated adequately, indicating the accuracy of the analysis. We chose seven significant pathways (cellular response to interleukin-1, chemokine-mediated signaling pathway, chemokine signaling pathway, cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction, inflammatory response, immune response, and TNF signaling pathway) for downstream analysis. Based on the pathway analysis, three candidate genes (CXCR1, CXCL8, and TNFAIP3) were chosen, and their qRT-PCR results were consistent with the sequencing results.

CONCLUSIONS

Through RNA-seq analysis, the effects of propofol and sevoflurane during lung cancer resection were different, mainly in inflammatory-related pathways, which might be possibly by targeting CXCL8.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registry number was ChiCTR1900026213 .

Research in Perioperative Care of the Cancer Patient: Opportunities and Challenges

The theory that the perioperative period is critical for oncological outcomes has been a matter of extensive preclinical and clinical research. Basic science research strongly supports the notion that surgical stress, anesthetics, and analgesics influence the mechanisms of cancer progression. Hence, it is hypothesized that perioperative interventions that impact mechanisms or predictors of tumor progression can also affect patients' survival. As a result of that hypothesis, clinical researchers have conducted many retrospective studies. However, much fewer randomized controlled trials have been performed to investigate whether surgery itself (minimally invasive versus open procedures), anesthetics (volatile anesthetics versus propofol-based anesthesia), analgesics (opioids versus opioid-free anesthesia), and blood transfusions (transfusions versus no transfusions) modify the survival of patients with cancer. Unfortunately, randomized controlled trials have failed to translate the preclinical results into clinical outcomes. In this review, I will highlight the challenges of translating basic science to clinical outcomes. We will also point out opportunities for future research.

Long-term effect of anesthesia choice on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing open liver resection

Clinical and experimental evidence suggested that anesthesia choice can influence cancer progression and patients' outcomes by modulating tumor microenvironment and tumorigenic pathways. Curative resection is the mainstay of therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which is an intractable disease due to high recurrence and poor prognosis. However, different anesthetics may play different roles in alleviating surgery-induced stress response and inflammatory cytokines release that are considered to be closely associated with proliferation, invasion and metastasis of tumor cells. Propofol, sevoflurane, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and local anesthetics have shown to exert anti-tumor effect on HCC mainly through regulating microRNAs or signaling pathways, while other inhalational agents, dexmedetomidine and opioids have the potential to promote tumor growth. In terms of anesthetic methods and analgesia strategies, propofol based total intravenous anesthesia and thoracic epidural analgesia could be preferred for HCC patients undergoing open liver resection rather than inhalational anesthesia. Local anesthesia techniques have great potential to attenuate perioperative stress response, hence they may contribute to more favorable outcomes. This review summarized the relations between different anesthesia choices and HCC patients' long-term outcomes as well as their underlying mechanisms. Due to the complexity of molecules interactions and signaling pathways, further studies are warranted to confirm these results so as to optimize anesthesia strategy for HCC patients.

Influence of Perioperative Anesthesia on Cancer Recurrence: from Basic Science to Clinical Practice

PURPOSEOF REVIEW

In this review, we will summarize the effects of these perioperative anesthetics and anesthetic interventions on the immune system and tumorigenesis as well as address the related clinical evidence on cancer-related mortality and recurrence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Cancer remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. For many solid tumors, surgery is one of the major therapies. Unfortunately, surgery promotes angiogenesis, shedding of circulating cancer cells, and suppresses immunity. Hence, the perioperative period has a close relationship with cancer metastases or recurrence. In the perioperative period, patients require multiple anesthetic management including anesthetics, anesthetic techniques, and body temperature control. Preclinical and retrospective studies have found that these anesthetic agents and interventions have complex effects on cancer outcomes. Therefore, well-planned, prospective, randomized controlled trials are required to explore the effects of different anesthetics and techniques on long-term outcomes after cancer surgery. Due to the conflicting effects of anesthetic management on cancer recurrence, further preclinical and clinical trials are required and beneficial to the development of systemic cancer therapies.

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.

Anesthetic‑specific lncRNA and mRNA profile changes in blood during colorectal cancer resection: A prospective, matched‑case pilot study

Prometastatic and antitumor effects of different anesthetics have been previously analyzed in several studies with conflicting results. Thus, the underlying perioperative molecular mechanisms mediated by anesthetics potentially affecting tumor phenotype and metastasis remain unclear. It was hypothesized that anesthetic‑specific long non‑coding RNA (lncRNA) expression changes are induced in the blood circulation and play a crucial role in tumor outcome. In the present study, high‑throughput sequencing and quantitative PCR were performed in order to identify lncRNA and mRNA expression changes affected by two therapeutic regimes, total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anesthetic gas (VAG) in patients undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) resection. Total blood RNA was isolated prior to and following resection and characterized using RNA sequencing. mRNA‑lncRNA interactions and their roles in cancer‑related signaling of differentially expressed lncRNAs were identified using bioinformatics analyses. The comparison of these two time points revealed 35 differentially expressed lncRNAs in the TIVA‑group, and 25 in the VAG‑group, whereas eight were shared by both groups. Two lncRNAs in the TIVA‑group, and 23 in the VAG‑group of in silico identified target‑mRNAs were confirmed as differentially regulated in the NGS dataset of the present study. Pathway analysis was performed and cancer relevant canonical pathways for TIVA were identified. Target‑mRNA analysis of VAG revealed a markedly worsened immunological response against cancer. In this proof‑of‑concept study, anesthesic‑specific expression changes in lncRNA and mRNA profiles in blood were successfully identified. Moreover, the data of the present study provide the first evidence that anesthesia‑induced lncRNA pattern changes may contribute further in the observed differences in CRC outcome following tumor resection.

An intravenous anesthetic drug-propofol, influences the biological characteristics of malignant tumors and reshapes the tumor microenvironment: A narrative literature review

Malignant tumors are the second leading cause of death worldwide. This is a public health concern that negatively impacts human health and poses a threat to the safety of life. Although there are several treatment approaches for malignant tumors, surgical resection remains the primary and direct treatment for malignant solid tumors. Anesthesia is an integral part of the operation process. Different anesthesia techniques and drugs have different effects on the operation and the postoperative prognosis. Propofol is an intravenous anesthetic that is commonly used in surgery. A substantial number of studies have shown that propofol participates in the pathophysiological process related to malignant tumors and affects the occurrence and development of malignant tumors, including anti-tumor effect, pro-tumor effect, and regulation of drug resistance. Propofol can also reshape the tumor microenvironment, including anti-angiogenesis, regulation of immunity, reduction of inflammation and remodeling of the extracellular matrix. Furthermore, most clinical studies have also indicated that propofol may contribute to a better postoperative outcome in some malignant tumor surgeries. Therefore, the author reviewed the chemical properties, pharmacokinetics, clinical application and limitations, mechanism of influencing the biological characteristics of malignant tumors and reshaping the tumor microenvironment, studies of propofol in animal tumor models and its relationship with postoperative prognosis of propofol in combination with the relevant literature in recent years, to lay a foundation for further study on the correlation between propofol and malignant tumor and provide theoretical guidance for the selection of anesthetics in malignant tumor surgery.

Propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia is associated with better survival than desflurane anesthesia in limb-salvage surgery for osteosarcoma: A retrospective analysis

Previous studies have demonstrated that anesthetic techniques can affect the outcomes of cancer surgery. We investigated the association between anesthetic techniques and patient outcomes after elective limb-salvage surgery for osteosarcoma (OS). This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent elective limb-salvage surgery for OS between January 2007 and December 2018. Patients were grouped according to the administration of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or desflurane (DES) anesthesia. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed, and survival curves were constructed from the date of surgery to death. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were applied to compare the hazard ratios (HRs) for death after propensity matching. Subgroup analyses were done for postoperative recurrence, metastasis, and tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging. A total of 30 patients (17 deaths, 56.7%) who received DES anesthesia and 26 (4 deaths, 15.4%) who received TIVA were eligible for analysis. After propensity matching, 22 patients were included in each group. In the matched analysis, patients who received TIVA had better survival with a HR of 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.81; P = .018). Subgroup analyses also showed significantly better survival in the presence of postoperative metastasis (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.06-0.87; P = .030) and with TNM stage II to III (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.09-0.73; P = .011) in the matched TIVA group. In addition, patients administered with TIVA had lower risks of postoperative recurrence and metastasis than those administered with DES anesthesia in the matched analyses. Propofol-based TIVA was associated with better survival in patients who underwent elective limb-salvage surgery for OS than DES anesthesia. Prospective studies are needed to assess the effects of TIVA on oncological outcomes in patients with OS.

Volatile anesthesia versus propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia: A retrospective analysis of charts of patients who underwent elective digestive tract cancer curative surgeries

The surgical stress responses, surgeries, and anesthetics used during surgeries have effects on post-surgery complications and metastasis. Volatile and/or intravenous anesthetics are generally used for cancer curative surgeries. Therefore, appropriate selection of anesthetics should be considered for better clinical outcomes. The objectives of the study were to compare postoperative complications, the overall survival, and recurrence-free survival of patients who had received volatile anesthesia against those of patients who had received propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia for digestive tract cancer curative surgeries. Patients had received propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (PA cohort, n = 120) or volatile anesthesia (VA cohort, n = 185) for elective digestive tract cancer curative surgeries. Patients with age > 50 years (P = .0399), body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 (P = .0423), cancer stage III (P = .0041), and cancer stage IV (P = .0189) were operated through volatile anesthesia. Females (P = .0346), disable patients (P = .0479), patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index 2 (P = .0449), patients with cancer stage 0 or I (P = .0141), and patients with cancer stage II (P = .0289) were operated through propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia. Postoperative complication(s) between patients of both cohorts were statistically same (P = .9217). After 3-years of the follow-up period, a total of 81 (44%) patients from the VA cohort and 63 (52%) patients from the PA cohort survived irrespective of any kind of disease(s) (P = .9918). Also, a total of 53 (29%) patients from the VA cohort and 42 (35%) patients from the PA cohort survived without progression of cancer (P = .9981) after 3-years. Age > 50 years (P = 0.0491), Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3 (P = 0.0481), and cancer stage > II (P = .0412) were independent parameters for death of patients suffering from digestive tract cancer due to any reason(s) during 3-years of the follow-up period after surgeries. The selection of anesthetic agents for cancer curative surgeries does not affect survival during 3-years of follow-up and postoperative complication(s) of patients suffering from digestive tract cancer (Level of Evidence: III; Technical Efficacy Stage: 4).

Volatile versus propofol general anesthesia and long-term survival after breast cancer surgery: a national registry retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Several retrospective studies using administrative or single center data have failed to show any difference between general anesthesia using propofol versus inhaled volatiles on long-term survival after breast cancer surgery. Although randomized controlled trials are ongoing, validated data from national clinical registries may advance the reliability of existing knowledge.

METHODS

Data on breast cancer surgery performed under general anesthesia between 2013 and 2019 from The Swedish PeriOperative Register and The National Quality Register for Breast Cancer were record-linked. Overall survival was compared between patients receiving propofol or inhaled volatile for anesthesia maintenance.

RESULTS

Of 18,674 subjects, 13,873 patients (74.3%) received propofol and 4,801 (25.7%) received an inhaled volatile for general anesthesia maintenance. The two cohorts differed in most respects. Patients receiving inhaled volatile were older (67 years vs 65 years), sicker (888 [19.0%] ASA status 3-5 versus 1,742 [12.8%]), and the breast cancer to be more advanced. Median follow-up was 33 months (IQR, 19 to 48). In the full, unmatched cohort, there was a statistically significantly higher overall survival among patients receiving propofol (13,489/ 13,873 (97.2%)) versus inhaled volatile (4,039/4,801 (84.1%)) hazard ratio = 0.80 (95% CI 0.70-0.90, P < 0.001). Following 1:1 propensity score matching (4,658 matched pairs) there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival, (propofol 4,284/4,658 (92.0%) versus inhaled volatile 4,288/4,658 (92.1%) hazard ratio = 0.98 (95% CI 0.85-1.13, P = 0.756)).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing breast cancer surgery under general anesthesia, no association was observed between the choice of propofol or an inhaled volatile maintenance and overall survival.

Does propofol definitely improve postoperative cognitive dysfunction?-a review of propofol-related cognitive impairment

Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common brain function-related complication after surgery. In addition to old age being an independent risk factor, anesthetics are also important predisposing factors. Among them, propofol is the most commonly used intravenous anesthetic in clinical practice. It has a rapid onset, short half-life, and high recovery quality. Many studies report that propofol can attenuate surgery-induced cognitive impairment, however, some other studies reveal that propofol also induces cognitive dysfunction. Therefore, this review summarizes the effects of propofol on the cognition, and discusses possible related mechanisms, which aims to provide some evidence for the follow-up studies.

Effect of sevoflurane versus propofol on neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in healthy individuals: a sub-study of a randomised crossover trial

Background

Sevoflurane and propofol are commonly used drugs in general anaesthesia. However, their effects on perioperative immune function are incompletely understood. We hypothesised that sevoflurane and propofol differentially affect immune function in healthy individuals. Therefore, we investigated the effect of sevoflurane and propofol on neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio before, during, and after general anaesthesia.

Methods

In this randomised crossover study, 19 healthy individuals underwent 2 h of general anaesthesia with either propofol or sevoflurane. After 4 weeks, anaesthesia was repeated using the other drug. Blood samples were obtained before, during, 1 h after, and 1 day after anaesthesia. The primary outcome was whole-blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and secondary outcomes were specific white blood cell differential counts. A linear mixed-effects model was used to estimate effect sizes.

Results

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was higher in the propofol compared with the sevoflurane group during anaesthesia, 2.8 (confidence interval [CI]: 2.3-3.3) vs 1.6 (CI: 1.1-2.1), and 1 day after anaesthesia, 2.6 (CI: 2.1-3.1) vs 1.9 (CI: 1.4-2.4). In all patients, we observed transient lymphopaenia during propofol anaesthesia, 1.1 × 109 cells × L-1 (CI: 0.9-1.4), compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia, 1.9 × 109 cells × L-1 (CI: 1.7-2.1). In addition, neutrophil counts were higher 1 day after propofol anaesthesia, 4.4 × 109 cells × L-1 (CI: 4.0-4.9), compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia, 3.5 × 109 cells × L-1 (CI: 3.1-4.0). We observed no differences in the remaining white blood cell subgroups.

Conclusions

In healthy individuals undergoing general anaesthesia without surgery, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was affected by the type of hypnotic used. Transient lymphopaenia was observed in all participants during propofol anaesthesia.

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

BACKGROUND

Different types of anesthesia may affect cancer patient's outcomes, we compared the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with pancreatic cancer under total intravenous and inhalation anesthesia.

METHODS

The authors collected the electronic medical records of patients who had accepted at a pancreatectomy from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2016. Patients respectively received total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or inhalational anesthesia (INHA). Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW)was used to minimize differences. Kaplan-Meier survival was established to analyze the influence of sort of anesthesia on disease-free and overall survival. We compare the effects of each sort of anesthesia on cancer recurrence or metastasis and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 463 patients who had undergone pancreatic cancer resection were collected in this study, of which 421 patients were available (TIVA group, n = 114 INHA group, n = 307). After SIPTW there were no significant differences between the two groups in disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.01, 95%CI, 0.78 to 1.29, P = 0.959) or overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.11, 95%CI, 0.87 to 1.42, P = 0.405).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the present study showed no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival between total intravenous anesthesia and volatile anesthesia.

Inhalation anaesthesia compared with total intravenous anaesthesia and postoperative complications in colorectal cancer surgery: an observational registry-based study†

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complications are common after colorectal surgery, and possibly related to the type of anaesthesia. We aimed to determine associations between the type of anaesthesia and complications after colorectal cancer surgery using Danish registries.

METHODS

Patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery (2004-18) were identified in the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database. The cohort was enriched with the Danish Anaesthesia Database and Danish National Prescription Registry data linked by Danish Central Person Registration number. Patients were classified according to type of general anaesthesia: inhalation or TIVA. Confounders were adjusted by propensity score matching. The primary outcome was complications within 30 days postoperatively. Secondarily, we assessed specific medical and surgical complications.

RESULTS

We identified 22 179 individuals undergoing colorectal cancer surgery with accompanying anaesthesia data. Propensity score matching yielded 8722 individuals per group. After propensity score matching, postoperative complications were seen in 1933 (22.2%) patients undergoing inhalation anaesthesia and in 2199 (25.2%) undergoing TIVA (odds ratio [OR]=0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.91). Although no difference was observed for medical complications, 1369 (15.7%) undergoing inhalation anaesthesia had surgical complications compared with 1708 (19.6%) undergoing TIVA (OR=0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83). Rates of wound dehiscence, anastomotic leak, ileus, wound abscess, intra-abdominal abscess, and sepsis were statistically significantly lower in the inhalation anaesthesia group.

CONCLUSION

In this propensity score-matched registry study, use of inhalation anaesthesia was associated with fewer postoperative complications after colorectal cancer surgery than use of TIVA. Inhalation anaesthesia was associated with fewer complications related to wound healing and surgical infections.

Anesthesia With Propofol Sedation Reduces Locoregional Recurrence in Patients With Breast Cancer Receiving Total Mastectomy Compared With Non-Propofol Anesthesia

Purpose

We examined locoregional recurrence (LRR) in patients with breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) receiving total mastectomy (TM) under propofol-based paravertebral block-regional anesthesia (PB-RA) versus sevoflurane-based inhalational general anesthesia (INHA-GA) without propofol. All-cause death and distant metastasis were secondary endpoints.

Patients and Methods

Patients with breast IDC receiving TM were recruited through propensity score matching and categorized into INHA-GA with sevoflurane and PB-RA with propofol groups. Cox regression analysis was performed to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, the adjusted HR (aHR; 95% CI) of LRR for the PB-RA with propofol group was 0.52 (0.28–0.96) compared with the INHA-GA with sevoflurane group. The aHRs of LRR for differentiation grade II, grade III, the American Joint Committee on Cancer clinical stage II, stage III, pathological tumor (pT) stage 2, pT stage 3–4, pathological nodal (pN) stage 1, and pN stage 2–3 were 1.16 (1.04–2.08), 1.28 (1.07–2.12), 3.71 (1.82–7.59), 4.67 (1.65–13.18), 1.09 (1.02–1.21), 1.17 (1.03–2.16), 1.10 (1.03–1.33), and 1.22 (1.06–2.41), respectively, compared with differentiation grade I, clinical stage I, pT1, and pN0. The aHR of LRR for adjuvant RT was 0.88 (0.64–0.94) compared with that for no adjuvant RT.

Conclusion

PB-RA with propofol might be beneficial for reducing LRR in women with breast IDC receiving TM compared with INHA-GA without propofol.

The influence of TIVA or inhalation anesthesia with or without intravenous lidocaine on postoperative outcome in colorectal cancer surgery: a study protocol for a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Anesthetic agents are mandatory in colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery. Studies published so far have shown that anesthetic drugs and intervention may have different impacts on patient's outcome. Among these drugs, propofol and, more recently, local anesthetics have been mostly targeted.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study will be a prospective randomized control trial aiming to include 400 patients scheduled for curative colorectal surgery. Patients will be randomized to have general anesthesia with propofol or with sevoflurane. Each study group will be further divided into 2 subgroups of patients, of which one will receive intravenous lidocaine perioperatively. The primary outcome is to compare the incidence of cancer recurrence and survival after propofol versus sevoflurane anesthesia added or not intravenous lidocaine. Secondary outcomes will include the severity of postoperative pain, resumption of bowel function, morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, postoperative chronic pain, and rate of postoperative complications.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first randomized control trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov designed to compare the effects of two different anesthetic techniques added perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on long-term outcomes exclusively in colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery. The study will bring more accurate data on the effect of propofol-TIVA and perioperative iv lidocaine on the incidence of recurrences after intended curative colorectal surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registration NCT02786329 . Registered on 1 June 2016.

Potential Influence of Anesthetic Interventions on Breast Cancer Early Recurrence According to Estrogen Receptor Expression: A Sub-Study of a Randomized Trial

Background

Effects of anesthetic interventions on cancer prognosis remain controversial. There is evidence that estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer patients have an early recurrence peak. We aimed to assess the potential benefit of regional anesthesia-analgesia versus general anesthesia regarding early recurrence in breast cancer according to ER expression.

Methods

Based on a multicenter randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00418457), we included all the patients from Peking Union Medical College Hospital research center in this study. The primary outcome was breast cancer recurrence after surgery. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare recurrence between groups.

Results

In total, 1,253 breast cancer patients were included in this sub-study, among whom the median follow-up time was 53 months. In this sub-study, 320 patients were ER-negative, and 933 were ER-positive. As for ER-negative patients, the recurrence risk in the PPA (paravertebral blocks and propofol general anesthesia) group showed no statistical difference compared with the GA (sevoflurane and opioids general anesthesia) group (19.1% versus 23.4%; adjusted HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50–1.30; P = 0.377). In the first 18 months after breast cancer surgery, which is considered as the classical early peak of recurrence, after adjustment for menstruation and the pathological stage of tumor, the decrease of early recurrence observed in the PPA group was not significant compared with the GA group (adjusted HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.34–1.14; P = 0.127).

Conclusions

In our study, the effects of early recurrence after breast cancer surgery in both ER-negative and ER-positive patients were similar between regional anesthesia-analgesia and general anesthesia. Large samples of ER-negative patients will be needed to clarify the effects of anesthetic interventions.

Application of Anesthetics in Cancer Patients: Reviewing Current Existing Link With Tumor Recurrence

Surgery remains the most effective cancer treatment, but residual disease in the form of scattered micro-metastases and tumor cells is usually unavoidable. Whether minimal residual disease results in clinical metastases is a function of host defense and tumor survival and growth. The much interesting intersection of anesthesiology and immunology has drawn increasing clinical interest, particularly, the existing concern of the possibility that the perioperative and intraoperative anesthetic care of the surgical oncology patient could meaningfully influence tumor recurrence. This paper examines current data, including recent large clinical trials to determine whether the current level of evidence warrants a change in practice. Available pieces of evidence from clinical studies are particularly limited, largely retrospective, smaller sample size, and often contradictory, causing several questions and providing few answers. Recent randomized controlled clinical trials, including the largest study (NCT00418457), report no difference in cancer recurrence between regional and general anesthesia after potentially curative surgery. Until further evidence strongly implicates anesthesia in future clinical trials, clinicians may continue to choose the optimum anesthetic-analgesic agents and techniques in consultation with their cancer patients, based on their expertise and current best practice.

Adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy might be associated with better survival in women with heart failure receiving total mastectomy

Background

To date, no data on the effect of adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) on oncologic outcomes, such as all-cause death, locoregional recurrence (LRR), and distant metastasis (DM), are available in women with left-side breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

Patients and methods

We enrolled 646 women with left-breast IDC at clinical stages I–IIIC and HFrEF receiving radical total mastectomy (TM) followed by adjuvant PMRT or non-adjuvant PMRT. We categorized them into two groups based on their adjuvant PMRT status and compared their overall survival (OS), LRR, and DM outcomes. We calculated the propensity score and applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to create a pseudo-study cohort. Furthermore, we performed a multivariate analysis of the propensity score–weighted population to obtain hazard ratios (HRs).

Results

In the IPTW-adjusted model, adjuvant PMRT (adjusted HR [aHR]: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37–0.74) was a significant independent prognostic factor for all-cause death (P = 0.0003), and the aHR (95% CI) of LRR and DM for adjuvant PMRT was 0.90 (0.79–0.96; P = 0.0356) and 0.89 (0.54–1.50; P = 0.6854), respectively, compared with the nonadjuvant PMRT group.

Conclusion

Adjuvant PMRT was associated with a decrease in all-cause death, and LRR in women with left IDC and HFrEF compared with nonadjuvant PMRT.

Expression Profiles of Immune Cells after Propofol or Sevoflurane Anesthesia for Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Prospective Double-blind Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The antitumor effects of natural killer cells, helper T cells, and cytotoxic T cells after cancer surgery were reported previously. This study hypothesized that propofol-based anesthesia would have fewer harmful effects on immune cells than volatile anesthetics-based anesthesia during colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

In total, 153 patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery were randomized and included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the fraction of circulating natural killer cells over time in the propofol and sevoflurane groups. The fractions of circulating natural killer, type 1, type 17 helper T cells, and cytotoxic T cells were investigated. The fractions of CD39 and CD73 expressions on circulating regulatory T cells were investigated, along with the proportions of circulating neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes.

RESULTS

The fraction of circulating natural killer cells was not significantly different between the propofol and sevoflurane groups until 24 h postoperatively (20.4 ± 13.4% vs. 20.8 ± 11.3%, 17.9 ± 12.7% vs. 20.7 ± 11.9%, and 18.6 ± 11.6% vs. 21.3 ± 10.8% before anesthesia and after 1 and 24 h after anesthesia, respectively; difference [95% CI], -0.3 [-4.3 to 3.6], -2.8 [-6.8 to 1.1], and -2.6 [-6.2 to 1.0]; P = 0.863, P = 0.136, and P = 0.151 before anesthesia and after 1 and 24 h, respectively). The fractions of circulating type 1 and type 17 helper T cells, cytotoxic T cells, and CD39+ and CD73+ circulating regulatory T cells were not significantly different between the two groups. The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in both groups remained within the normal range and was not different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol-based anesthesia was not superior to sevoflurane-based anesthesia in terms of alleviating suppression of immune cells including natural killer cells and T lymphocytes during colorectal cancer surgery.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Effects of Propofol Versus Sevoflurane on Postoperative Breast Cancer Prognosis: A Narrative Review

Perioperative interventions produce substantial biologic perturbations which are associated with the risk of recurrence after cancer surgery. The changes of tumor microenvironment caused by anesthetic drugs received increasing attention. Till now, it’s still unclear whether or not anesthetic drugs may exert positive or negative impact on cancer outcomes after surgery. Breast cancer is the most common tumor and the leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Propofol and sevoflurane are respectively the most commonly used intravenous and inhaled anesthetics. Debates regarding which of the two most commonly used anesthetics may relatively contribute to the recurrence and metastasis vulnerability of breast cancer postoperatively remain. This review aimed to provide a comprehensive view about the effect of propofol versus sevoflurane on the prognosis of breast cancer obtained from pre-clinical studies and clinical studies. Laboratory and animal studies have demonstrated that sevoflurane may enhance the recurrence and metastasis of breast cancer, while propofol is more likely to reduce the activity of breast cancer cells by attenuating the suppression of the immune system, promoting tumor cells apoptosis, and through other direct anti-tumor effects. However, retrospective clinical studies have shown contradictory results about the effects of propofol and sevoflurane on long-term survival in breast cancer patients. Furthermore, recent prospective studies did not identify significant differences between propofol and sevoflurane in breast cancer metastasis and recurrence. Therefore, more preclinical studies and randomized controlled studies are needed to guide the choice of anesthetics for breast cancer patients.

Epidural Analgesia and Recurrence after Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Danish Retrospective Registry-based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the main curative treatment for colorectal cancer. Yet the immunologic and humoral response to surgery may facilitate progression of micro-metastases. It has been suggested that epidural analgesia preserves immune competency and prevents metastasis formation. Hence, the authors tested the hypothesis that epidural analgesia would result in less cancer recurrence after colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

The Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database and the Danish Anesthesia Database were used to identify patients operated for colorectal cancer between 2004 and 2018 with no residual tumor tissue left after surgery. The exposure group was defined by preoperative insertion of an epidural catheter for analgesia. The primary outcome was colorectal cancer recurrence, and the secondary outcome was mortality. Recurrences were identified using a validated algorithm based on data from Danish health registries. Follow-up was until death or September 7, 2018. The authors used propensity score matching to adjust for potential preoperative confounders.

RESULTS

In the study population of 11,618 individuals, 3,496 (30.1%) had an epidural catheter inserted before surgery. The epidural analgesia group had higher proportions of total IV anesthesia, laparotomies, and rectal tumors, and epidural analgesia was most frequently used between 2009 and 2012. The propensity score-matched study cohort consisted of 2,980 individuals in each group with balanced baseline covariates. Median follow-up was 58 months (interquartile range, 29 to 86). Recurrence occurred in 567 (19.0%) individuals in the epidural analgesia group and 610 (20.5%) in the group without epidural analgesia. The authors found no association between epidural analgesia and recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.02) or mortality (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.10).

CONCLUSIONS

In colorectal cancer surgery, epidural analgesia was not statistically significantly associated with less cancer recurrence.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Effect of Inhalation Anesthetics on Tumor Metastasis

Many factors affect the prognosis of patients undergoing tumor surgery, and anesthesia is one of the potential influencing factors. In general anesthesia, inhalation anesthesia is widely used in the clinic because of its strong curative effect and high controllability. However, the effect of inhalation anesthetics on the tumor is still controversial. More and more research has proved that inhalation anesthetics can intervene in local recurrence and distant metastasis of tumor by acting on tumor biological behavior, immune response, and gene regulation. In this paper, we reviewed the research progress of diverse inhalation anesthetics promoting or inhibiting cancer in the critical events of tumor recurrence and metastasis, and compared the effects of inhalation anesthetics on patients' prognosis in clinical studies, to provide theoretical reference for anesthesia management of patients undergoing tumor surgery.

Anesthesia Techniques and Long-Term Oncological Outcomes

Despite advances in cancer treatments, surgery remains one of the most important therapies for solid tumors. Unfortunately, surgery promotes angiogenesis, shedding of cancer cells into the circulation and suppresses anti-tumor immunity. Together this increases the risk of tumor metastasis, accelerated growth of pre-existing micro-metastasis and cancer recurrence. It was theorized that regional anesthesia could influence long-term outcomes after cancer surgery, however new clinical evidence demonstrates that the anesthesia technique has little influence in oncologic outcomes. Several randomized controlled trials are in progress and may provide a better understanding on how volatile and intravenous hypnotics impact cancer progression. The purpose of this review is to summarize the effect of the anesthesia techniques on the immune system and tumor microenvironment (TME) as well as to summarize the clinical evidence of anesthesia techniques on cancer outcomes.

Adjuvant Whole Breast Radiotherapy Improve Survival in Women with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction Receiving Breast-Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

to date, no data on the effect of adjuvant whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) on oncologic outcomes, such as all-cause death, locoregional recurrence (LRR), and distant metastasis (DM), are available in women with left-side breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

we included 294 women with left-breast IDC at clinical stages IA-IIIC and HFrEF receiving breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by adjuvant WBRT or non-adjuvant WBRT. We categorized them into two groups based on their adjuvant WBRT status and compared their overall survival (OS), LRR, and DM outcomes. We calculated the propensity score and applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to create a pseudo-study cohort. Furthermore, we performed a multivariate analysis of the propensity score-weighted population to obtain hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

in the IPTW-adjusted model, adjuvant WBRT (adjusted HR [aHR]: 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-0.94) was a significant independent prognostic factor for all-cause death (p = 0.0424), and the aHR (95% CI) of LRR and DM for adjuvant WBRT was 0.33 (0.24-0.71; p = 0.0017) and 0.37 (0.22-0.63; p = 0.0004), respectively, compared with the non-adjuvant WBRT group.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant WBRT was associated with a decrease in all-cause death, LRR, and DM in women with left IDC and HFrEF compared with non-adjuvant WBRT.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes of spontaneous ventilation video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Spontaneous ventilation video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (SV-VATS) exhibits dual intraoperative and postoperative advantages for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there is a lack of data regarding its long-term survival superiority over the double-lumen intubated mechanical ventilation video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (MV-VATS) or thoracotomy.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted from 2011 to 2018 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University among patients with NSCLC who underwent the SV-VATS or the MV-VATS. Patients receiving the SV-VATS were the study group, and patients receiving the MV-VATS were the control group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to establish 1:1 SV-VATS versus MV-VATS group matching to balance potential baseline confounding factors. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints were perioperative outcomes. The baseline information of these patients was recorded. The perioperative data and survival data were collected using a combination of electronic data record system and telephone interview. A 1:1:1 SPM was also used to compare the OS in the SV-VATS, the MV-VATS and thoracotomy group by using another database, including patients undergoing thoracotomy and the MV-VATS.

Results

For the two-group comparison, after 1:1 PSM, a matched cohort with 400 (200:200) patients was generated. The median follow-up time in this cohort was 4.78 years (IQR, 3.78–6.62 years). The OS (HR =0.567, 95% CI, 0.330 to 0.974, P=0.0498) and the DFS (HR =0.546, 95% CI, 0.346 to 0.863, P=0.013) of the SV-VATS group were significantly better than the MV-VATS group. There were no statistically differences between the SV-VATS and the MV-VATS group on the operative time (158.56±40.09 vs. 172.06±61.75, P=0.200) anesthesia time (247.4±62.49 vs. 256.7±58.52, P=0.528), and intraoperative bleeding volume (78.88±80.25 vs. 109.932±180.86, P=0.092). For the three-group comparison, after 1:1:1 PSM, 582 (194:194:194) patients were included for the comparison of SV-VATS, MV-VATS and thoracotomy. The OS of the SV-VATS group was significantly better than the thoracotomy group (HR =0.379, 95% CI, 0.233 to 0.617, P<0.001).

Conclusions

Invasive NSCLC patients undergoing SV-VATS lobectomy demonstrated better long-term outcomes compared with MV-VATS.

Ambulatory surgery for cancer patients: current controversies and concerns

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to describe the main concerns and controversies of ambulatory surgery in cancer patients while providing an overview of ambulatory cancer anaesthesia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Cancer patients can undergo a variety of ambulatory surgeries. The introduction of robotic approach and the implementation of enhanced recovery programmes have allowed patients to avoid hospital admissions after more complex or invasive surgeries. In this context, the anaesthesiologist plays a key role in ensuring that the ambulatory surgical centre or the hospital-based ambulatory department is equipped for the perioperative challenges of the cancer population. Cancer patients tend to be older and with more comorbidities than the general population. In addition, these individuals may suffer from chronic conditions solely because of the cancer itself, or the treatment. Consequently, frailty is not uncommon and should be screened on a routine basis. Regional analgesia plays a key role in the provision of opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia.

SUMMARY

Neither regional anaesthesia or general anaesthesia have proven to affect the long-term oncological outcomes of cancer patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. In addition, there is insufficient evidence to suggest the use of total intravenous anaesthesia or inhalational anaesthesia over the other to decrease cancer recurrence.

Propofol-Based Total Intravenous Anesthesia is Associated with Better Survival than Desflurane Anesthesia in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Previous studies have shown that anesthetic techniques can affect outcomes of cancer surgery. We investigated the association between anesthetic techniques and patient outcomes after elective epithelial ovarian cancer surgery.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who received elective open surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer between January 2009 and December 2014. Patients were grouped according to the administration of propofol or desflurane anesthesia. Kaplan–Meier analysis was performed, and survival curves were constructed from the date of surgery to death. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were used to compare hazard ratios for death after propensity matching. Subgroup analyses were performed for age, body mass index, preoperative carbohydrate antigen-125 level, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging, and operation and anesthesia time.

Results: In total, 165 patients (76 deaths, 46.1%) who received desflurane anesthesia and 119 (30 deaths, 25.2%) who received propofol anesthesia were eligible for analysis. After propensity matching, 104 patients were included in each group. In the matched analysis, patients who received propofol anesthesia had better survival with a hazard ratio of 0.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.33–0.81; p = 0.005). Subgroup analyses also showed significantly better survival with old age, high body mass index, elevated carbohydrate antigen-125 level, advanced International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, and prolonged operation and anesthesia time in the matched propofol group. In addition, patients administered with propofol anesthesia had less postoperative recurrence and metastasis than those administered with desflurane anesthesia in the matched analysis.

Conclusion: Propofol anesthesia was associated with better survival in patients who underwent elective epithelial ovarian cancer open surgery. Prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the effects of propofol anesthesia on oncological outcomes in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Effects of Serum From Radiofrequency Ablation Patients Receiving General Anesthesia or Local Anesthesia on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cancer Cell Malignancy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Whether anesthesia methods affect malignant biological behavior of cancer remains unresolved. In this study, we aim to compare the effects of general anesthesia (GA) and local anesthesia (LA) on serum collected from primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients presenting for radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

Methods

From August 2020 to December 2020, a prospective, randomized, and controlled study was conducted at Renji Hospital, which is affiliated with Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine. 25 qualified patients from 18 to 65 years of age undergoing RFA were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned into two groups: the GA group (n = 14) and the LA group (n = 11). Venous blood was drawn from all patients preoperatively and 1 hour postoperatively. The serum collected was then used for the culturing of HepG2 cells. The malignant biological behaviors of HepG2 cells, including invasion, migration and proliferation, were observed after 24 hours of exposure to patients’ serum. ELISA was used to compare expression levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α) and lymphokines (IFN-γ, IL-2) in patients’ serum from both groups.

Results

HepG2 cells cultured with postoperative serum obtained from patients who received GA, but not LA, were associated with significantly increased cell invasion, migration and proliferation, compared to preoperative serum from the same patient group. Expression levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines were significantly higher, and lymphokines significantly lower in postoperative serum from GA patients compared to the corresponding preoperative serum.

Conclusion

GA affects the serum milieu of patients with HCC, promoting the malignant biological behavior of a human HCC cell line.