Clinical Value of Total Intravenous Anesthesia with Sufentanil and Propofol in Radical Mastectomy

Effects and mechanisms of perioperative medications on the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal response to surgical injury: A narrative review

The adrenal gland is a vital endocrine organ, and adrenal steroid synthesis and secretion are closely regulated by the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in response to various stimuli. Surgery or trauma can activate the HPA axis and induce the secretion of cortisol. Different cortisol responses vary with the grade of surgery. Perioperative medications have the potential to decrease the cortisol level in the body, and both excessive and insufficient cortisol levels after surgery are disadvantageous. The effect of perioperative medications on the HPA response to surgery can be divided into three levels: "adrenal insufficiency (AI)", "stress response inhibition", and "uncertainty". The clinical presentation of AI includes fatigue, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, muscle cramps, hypotension, hypovolemic shock and prerenal failure, which may result in fatal consequences. Stress response inhibition can reduce postoperative complications, such as pain and cognitive dysfunction. This is protective to patients during perioperative and postoperative periods. The aim of the present review is to shed light on current evidence regarding the exact effects and mechanisms of perioperative medications on the HPA response to surgical injury and provide the applicable guidance on clinical anesthesia.

Esketamine combined with sufentanil versus sufentanil in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia: a meta-analysis

Objective: Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) can alleviate pain to some extent, and several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined the efficacy of esketamine-assisted sufentanil in postoperative PCIA. In this research, we conducted a meta-analysis of relevant RCTs to compare the effect and safety of esketamine-sufentanil versus sufentanil alone for postoperative PCIA. Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and other libraries up to December 2023 to screen out RCTs examining the use of esketamine combined with sufentanil for PCIA. We analysed analgesia scores, sedation scores, adverse drug reactions and postpartum depression scores as outcome indicators. Results: This meta-analysis included 32 RCTs. The results of the meta-analysis were as follows. 1) Visual Analog Scale: The VAS scores at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h were lower in the esketamine-sufentanil group than in the sufentanil alone group, and significant differences were found at all time points (p < 0.05). 2) Ramsay Sedation Scale: The sedation score of the esketamine-sufentanil group at 48 h after surgery was higher than that of the sufentanil group alone [mean difference (MD) = -0.09 points, confidence interval (CI): (-0.26, -0.07), p = 0.27], but this difference was not significant (p > 0.05). 3) Safety: Compared with sufentanil alone, the incidence rates of postoperative nausea-vomiting, dizziness-headache, skin pruritus and respiratory depression were significantly lower in the esketamine-sufentanil group. 4) Postartum depression: The reduction in postpartum depression scores were significantly greater in the esketamine-sufentanil group than in the sufentanil alone group at 3 days [MD = -1.35 points, CI: (-1.89, -0.81), p < 0.00001] and 7 days [MD = -1.29 points, CI: (-2.42, -0.16), p = 0.03]. Conclusion: The meta-analysis showed that the use of esketamine combined with sufentanil for postoperative PCIA could improve postoperative analgesia, alleviate postpartum depression and reduce the rate of postoperative adverse reactions, but there was no significant difference in sedation.

Anesthesia-related postoperative oncological surgical outcomes: a comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and volatile anesthesia. A meta-analysis

Introduction

In patients undergoing cancer surgery, it is ambiguous whether propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) elicits a significantly higher overall survival rate than volatile anesthetics (VA). Consequently, evaluating the impact of TIVA and VA on long-term oncological outcomes is crucial.

Aim

This study compared TIVA versus VA for cancer surgery patients and investigated the potential correlation between anesthetics and their long-term surgical outcomes.

Material and methods

A comprehensive search of Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library identified English-language peer-reviewed journal papers. The statistical measurements of hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI were calculated. We assessed heterogeneity using Cochrane Q and I2 statistics and the appropriate p-value. The analysis used RevMan 5.3.

Results

The meta-analysis included 10 studies with 14036 cancer patients, 6264 of whom received TIVA and 7777 VA. In this study, we examined the long-term oncological outcomes of cancer surgery patients with TIVA and VA. Our data show that the TIVA group had a considerably higher overall survival rate (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.30-0.80) and recurrence-free survival rate (HR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.32-0.97). Each outcome was statistically significant (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The present study concludes that TIVA is a more effective anesthetic agent than VA in obtaining better long-term oncological outcomes in cancer patients after surgery as it provides a higher overall survival rate, a higher recurrence-free survival rate and fewer post-operative pathological findings in patients who have undergone surgery for cancer as compared to VA.

Effects of propofol combined with sufentanil on painless gastroscopy and hemodynamics in children under general anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of propofol combined with sufentanil on painless gastroscopy and hemodynamics in children under general anesthesia.

METHODS

The data of 98 children who received painless gastroscopy in the Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from May 2022 and November 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients anesthetized with propofol (1.5-2 mg/kg) combined with sufentanil (0.03-0.05 μg/kg) were assigned to a study group (n=52), and patients anesthetized with propofol (1.5-2 mg/kg) combined with fentanyl (0.3-0.5 µg/kg) were included in a control group (n=46). The changes in hemodynamic levels (mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) at T0 (before anesthesia), T1 (1 min after anesthesia induction), T2 (start of examination), T3 (2 min after the start of examination), and T4 (end of examination) in the two groups were analyzed and compared. The Ramsay sedation score was adopted to evaluate the sedation of the two groups at the anesthesia recovery and at 1 h and 2 h after the anesthesia recovery. The anesthetic effects (time to loss of consciousness, eye opening, and recovery of orientations) of the two groups were analyzed and compared. The excellent and good anesthesia outcomes, hospitalization time and dosage of propofol were compared between the two groups, and the adverse reactions in the two groups during and after the examination were analyzed.

RESULTS

At T0, the two groups were not significantly different in the levels of MAP, HR and SpO2 (P>0.05), but at T1, T2, T3, and T4, the study group showed a significantly higher MAP level than the control group (P<0.05). At T1 and T3, the study group exhibited a significantly higher HR level than the control group (P<0.05), and at T2 and T4, the HR level of the two groups was not greatly different (P>0.05). The SpO2 levels at T0, T1, T2, T3, and T4 were not greatly different between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in Ramsay score between the two groups at anesthesia recovery and at 1 h and 2 h after the anesthesia recovery (P>0.05). Additionally, the study group experienced significantly earlier time to loss of consciousness, eye opening, and recovery of orientations than the control group (P<0.05). The number of patients with excellent anesthetic outcome in the study group was notably higher than that in the control group (P<0.05). Compared with the control group, the study group consumed less propofol, experienced shorter hospitalization time, and showed a notably lower incidence of adverse reactions (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

For children undergoing painless gastroscopy under general anesthesia, sufentanil combined with propofol can deliver better anesthetic effect than propofol combined with fentanyl, with less effect on hemodynamics and fewer gastroscopy-related adverse reactions.