Positive Impact of Epidural Analgesia on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases

Impact of Surgical and Anesthetic Procedures after Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study (The PROCOL Study)

Background: Surgical inflammatory pain decreases the innate and adaptive immune antitumor response and favors residual circulating tumor cells. Objectives: This study investigated whether minimally invasive surgeries (laparoscopic and robotic procedures), which are less painful and inflammatory, improved oncological outcomes after colorectal resection compared to laparotomy. Methods: This research was a single-center propensity score-matched study involving patients who underwent colectomy and rectum resection from July 2017 to December 2019. Results: Seventy-four laparotomies and 211 minimally invasive procedures were included. Minimally invasive procedures were associated with less blood loss (0 mL vs. 75 mL, p < 0.001), shorter length of stay (8 days vs. 12 days, p < 0.001), and fewer complications at 3 months (11.8% vs. 29.4%, p = 0.02) compared to laparotomies. No difference in overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 3 years between groups was observed. Univariate Cox regression analyses demonstrated that age and ASA > 3 can negatively impact OS, while adjuvant chemotherapy can positively influence OS. pT3-T4 stage and postoperative pain could negatively influence RFS. Multivariate Cox regression analyses concluded that age (HR 1.08, p < 0.01) and epidural analgesia (HR 0.12, p = 0.03) were predictors for OS. Lidocaine infusion (HR 0.39, p = 0.04) was a positive predictor for RFS. Conclusions: Minimally invasive procedures reduce postoperative complications and shorten the length of hospital stay compared to major surgeries without improving prognosis. However, the administration of local anesthetics through neuraxial anesthesia or intravenous infusion could improve survival and decrease the occurrence of relapses.

Trial watch: local anesthetics in cancer therapy

Preclinical evidence indicates potent antitumor properties of local anesthetics. Numerous underlying mechanisms explaining such anticancer effects have been identified, suggesting direct cytotoxic as well as indirect immunemediated effects that together reduce the proliferative, invasive and migratory potential of malignant cells. Although some retrospective and correlative studies support these findings, prospective randomized controlled trials have not yet fully confirmed the antineoplastic activity of local anesthetics, likely due to the intricate methodology required for mitigating confounding factors. This trial watch aims at compiling all published preclinical and clinical research, along with completed and ongoing trials, that explore the potential antitumor effects of local anesthetics.

Ropivacaine-loaded hydrogels for prolonged relief of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathic pain and potentiated chemotherapy

Chemotherapy can cause severe pain for patients, but there are currently no satisfactory methods of pain relief. Enhancing the efficacy of chemotherapy to reduce the side effects of high-dose chemotherapeutic drugs remains a major challenge. Moreover, the treatment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathic pain (CIPNP) is separate from chemotherapy in the clinical setting, causing inconvenience to cancer patients. In view of the many obstacles mentioned above, we developed a strategy to incorporate local anesthetic (LA) into a cisplatin-loaded PF127 hydrogel for painless potentiated chemotherapy. We found that multiple administrations of cisplatin-loaded PF127 hydrogels (PFC) evoked severe CIPNP, which correlated with increased pERK-positive neurons in the dorsal root ganglion (DRG). However, incorporating ropivacaine into the PFC relieved PFC-induced CIPNP for more than ten hours and decreased the number of pERK-positive neurons in the DRG. Moreover, incorporating ropivacaine into the PFC for chemotherapy is found to upregulate major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC-I) expression in tumor cells and promote the infiltration of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CD8+ T cells) in tumors, thereby potentiating chemotherapy efficacy. This study proposes that LA can be used as an immunemodulator to enhance the effectiveness of chemotherapy, providing new ideas for painless cancer treatment.

Effect of Thoracic Epidural Anesthesia on Perioperative Neutrophil Extracellular Trapping Markers in Patients Undergoing Anesthesia and Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Neutrophil extracellular trapping (NETosis) is an immunologic mechanism strongly linked with increased metastatic risk in colorectal cancer. The authors hypothesized that patients who received propofol-epidural anesthesia (PEA) would exhibit decreases in the expression of serum neutrophil myeloperoxidase (MPO) and citrullinated histone H3 (H3Cit) levels compared with patients who received general anesthesia (GA).

METHODS

Colorectal cancer surgery patients were randomly assigned to the PEA (n = 30) or GA (n = 30) group. Serum MPO, H3Cit, and metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) levels before surgery and 24 h after surgery were measured, and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were recorded.

RESULTS

The patients who received PEA showed decreases in MPO (28.06 ± 11.23 vs 20.54 ± 7.29 ng/ ml; P = 0.004) and H3Cit [3.22 ± 0.86 vs 2.73 ± 0.94 ng/ ml; P = 0.042) 24 h after surgery compared with the patients subjected to GA. In addition, there was no difference in MMP-9 levels (75.98 ± 26.9 vs 73.45 ± 28.4 ng/ ml; P = 0.726). The visual analogue scale scores 2 h and 24 h after operation were significantly lower in PEA group (P < 0.05). The number of postoperative analgesia pump pressings and sufentanil consumptions within 48 h after surgery were significantly lower in the PEA group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol-epidural anesthesia reduces the expression of NETosis (MPO and H3Cit) in serum during colorectal cancer surgery.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2200066708 ( www.chictr.org.cn ).

Risk factors for discontinuation of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after general surgery: a retrospective cohort study

Identifying patients at risk for developing side effects secondary to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) and making the necessary adjustments in pain management are crucial. We investigated the risk factors of discontinuing IV PCA due to side effects following general surgery; adult patients who received IV PCA after general surgery (2020-2022) were included. Data on postoperative pain intensity, PCA pain relief, side effects, continuity of PCA use, and PCA pump settings were collected from the records of the acute pain management team. The primary outcome was identifying the risk factors associated with PCA discontinuation due to side effects. Of the 8745 patients included, 94.95% used opioid-containing PCA, and 5.05% used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-only PCA; 600 patients discontinued PCA due to side effects. Female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.74-4.01), hepato-pancreatic-biliary surgery (aOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06-1.94) and background infusion of PCA (aOR 1.42, 95% CI 1.04, 1.94) were associated with an increased likelihood of PCA discontinuation. Preoperative opioid use (aOR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.85) was linked with a decreased likelihood of PCA discontinuation. These findings highlight the importance of individualized pain management, considering patient characteristics and surgical procedures.

Effect of regional anesthesia and analgesia on long-term survival following abdominal cancer Surgery-A systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

The impact of regional anesthesia and analgesia (RAA) on long-term survival following cancer surgery is a topic of debate. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of perioperative RAA on long-term oncological outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery.

Methods

The authors searched computerized databases and reference lists from inception to December 20, 2022. All studies that investigated the effects of perioperative RAA on long-term oncological outcomes following major abdominal cancer surgery were included. Using the inverse variance method with a random-effects model, hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

Results

The systematic review included 51 retrospective studies, one prospective study, and three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 95,046 patients. The results showed that perioperative RAA may improve long-term overall survival (HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.80 to 0.91, P = 0.00, I2 = 60.2%). However, there was no significant association between perioperative RAA and reduced cancer recurrence (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.03, P = 0.31, I2 = 52.3%). When performing a pooled analysis of the data from the three RCTs, no statistically significant effect of RAA was found in either case.

Conclusion

The systematic review suggests perioperative RAA may improve long-term overall survival but does not appear to reduce cancer recurrence in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery. The limited number of RCTs included in this study did not confirm this finding, highlighting the need for further RCTs to corroborate these results.

Influence of opioid analgesia type on circulating tumor cells in open colorectal cancer surgery (POACC-1): study protocol for a prospective randomized multicenter controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Opioids and epidural analgesia are a mainstay of perioperative analgesia but their influence on cancer recurrence remains unclear. Based on retrospective data, we found that cancer recurrence following colorectal cancer surgery correlates with the number of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the early postoperative period. Also, morphine- but not piritramide-based postoperative analgesia increases the presence of CTCs and shortens cancer-specific survival. The influence of epidural analgesia on CTCs has not been studied yet.

METHODS

We intend to enroll 120 patients in four centers in this prospective randomized controlled trial. The study protocol has been approved by Ethics Committees in all participating centers. Patients undergoing radical open colorectal cancer surgery are randomized into epidural, morphine, and piritramide groups for perioperative analgesia. The primary outcome is the difference in the number of CTCs in the peripheral blood before surgery, on the second postoperative day, and 2-4 weeks after surgery. The number of CTCs is measured using molecular biology methods. Perioperative care is standardized, and relevant data is recorded. A secondary outcome, if feasible, would be the expression and activity of various receptor subtypes in cancer tissue. We intend to perform a 5-year follow-up with regard to metastasis development.

DISCUSSION

The mode of perioperative analgesia favorably affecting cancer recurrence would decrease morbidity/mortality. To identify such techniques, trials with long-term follow-up periods seem suboptimal. Given complex oncological therapeutic strategies, such trials likely disable the separation of perioperative analgesia effects from other factors. We believe that early postoperative CTCs presence/dynamics may serve as a sensitive marker of various perioperative interventions´ influences on cancer recurrence. Importantly, it is unbiased to the influence of long-term factors and minimally invasive. Analysis of opioid/cannabinoid receptor subtypes in cancer tissue would improve understanding of underlying mechanisms and promote personalization of treatment. We are not aware of any similar ongoing studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03700411, registration date: October 3, 2018.

STUDY STATUS

recruiting.

Effects of different anesthesia methods on postoperative immune function in patients undergoing gastrointestinal tumor resection

To investigate the effects of different anesthetic methods on postoperative immune function in patients undergoing gastrointestinal tumor resection. Ninety patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal tumor resection were divided into 3 groups. Patients in the GA group were anesthetized by total intravenous anesthesia. The GE group was anesthetized by general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia. The GN group was anesthetized by general anesthesia combined with bilateral Transversus Abdominis Plane block (TAP) and rectus sheath nerve blocks. General anesthesia is total intravenous anesthesia in all three groups. Blood samples were taken to test the changes of peripheral lymphocyte subtype analysis, and levels of plasma cortisol, epinephrine, norepinephrine. Also, the dosage of anesthetic drugs, recovery time, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded. Postoperative immune indexes, including CD4 count, CD8 count, B, and NK cells, in the GE group were significantly higher than those in NA and GA groups (P < 0.01). Perioperative stress indices, including epinephrine levels, norepinephrine level and aldosterone level, in the GE group were significantly lower than in the GA group and GN group (P < 0.01). The intraoperative/total sufentanil dosage and remifentanil dosage in the GE group were significantly lower than those in the GA and GN groups (P < 0.01). The VAS scores in the GE group were significantly better than those in GA and GN groups (P < 0.01). General anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia attenuates the increase in inflammatory mediators. Its possible mechanisms include reducing perioperative stress response and reducing perioperative opioid use.

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.

Direct Cytotoxic and Indirect, Immune-Mediated Effects of Local Anesthetics Against Cancer

Local anesthetics are frequently employed during surgery in order to control peri- and postoperative pain. Retrospective studies have revealed an unexpected correlation between increased long-term survival and the use of local anesthetics during oncological surgery. This effect of local anesthetics might rely on direct cytotoxic effects on malignant cells or on indirect, immune-mediated effects. It is tempting to speculate, yet needs to be formally proven, that the combination of local anesthetics with oncological surgery and conventional anticancer therapy would offer an opportunity to control residual cancer cells. This review summarizes findings from fundamental research together with clinical data on the use of local anesthetics as anticancer standalone drugs or their combination with conventional treatments. We suggest that a better comprehension of the anticancer effects of local anesthetics at the preclinical and clinical levels may broadly improve the surgical treatment of cancer.

Association Between Epidural Analgesia and Cancer Recurrence or Survival After Surgery for Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Weighted Analysis

Whether epidural anesthesia and analgesia (EA) is beneficial for postoperative cancer outcomes remains controversial and we conducted this historical cohort study to evaluate the association between EA and long-term outcomes following surgery for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We collected patients receiving RCC surgery from 2011 to 2017 and followed up them until February 2020. Patient attributes, surgical factors and pathological features were gathered through electronic medical chart review. The association between EA and recurrence-free and overall survival after surgery was evaluated using Cox regression models with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to balance the observed covariates. The median follow-up time for the 725 included patients was 50 months (interquartile range: 25.3–66.5) and 145 of them (20%) received perioperative EA. We demonstrated EA use was associated with better recurrence-free survival [IPTW adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49–0.83, p < 0.001] and overall survival [IPTW adjusted HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49–0.89, p = 0.006] in patients receiving surgical resection for RCC. More prospective studies are needed to verify this connection between EA and superior cancer outcomes after RCC surgery.

Effects of Perioperative Epidural Analgesia on Cancer Recurrence and Survival

Surgical resection is the main curative avenue for various cancers. Unfortunately, cancer recurrence following surgery is commonly seen, and typically results in refractory disease and death. Currently, there is no consensus whether perioperative epidural analgesia (EA), including intraoperative and postoperative epidural analgesia, is beneficial or harmful on cancer recurrence and survival. Although controversial, mounting evidence from both clinical and animal studies have reported perioperative EA can improve cancer recurrence and survival via many aspects, including modulating the immune/inflammation response and reducing the use of anesthetic agents like inhalation anesthetics and opioids, which are independent risk factors for cancer recurrence. However, these results depend on the cancer types, cancer staging, patients age, opioids use, and the duration of follow-up. This review will summarize the effects of perioperative EA on the oncological outcomes of patients after cancer 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.

Anesthetic care influences long-term outcomes: What is the evidence?

Despite advances in cancer therapy surgery remains one of the most important treatments for solid tumors; however, even with the development of better and less invasive surgical techniques, surgery is characterized by the increased risk of tumor metastasis, accelerated growth of pre-existing micrometastasis and cancer recurrence. Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and regional anesthesia have been proposed to improve long-term outcomes after cancer surgery by different mechanisms, including attenuation of the neuroendocrine response, immunosuppression, decreased opioid requirements (opioids promote angiogenesis and tumor growth) and avoidance of volatile inhalational agents. Much of the data that support these ideas originate from laboratory studies, while there is no clear consensus from the retrospective cohort studies to date. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are in progress and may provide a better understanding regarding the role of the anesthesiologist in cancer surgery. The purpose of this review is to summarize the experimental and human data regarding the effect of anesthesia agents and anesthesia techniques on cancer outcomes.

Anesthetic technique and cancer surgery outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Surgery remains integral to treating solid cancers. However, the surgical stress response, characterized by physiologic perturbation of the adrenergic, inflammatory, and immune systems, may promote procancerous pathways. Anesthetic technique per se may attenuate/enhance these pathways and thereby could be implicated in long-term cancer outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

To date, clinical studies have predominantly been retrospective and underpowered and, thus limit meaningful conclusions. More recently, prospective studies of regional anesthesia for breast and colorectal cancer surgery have failed to demonstrate long-term cancer outcome benefit. However, based on the consistent observation of protumorigenic effects of surgical stress and that of volatile anesthesia in preclinical studies, supported by in vivo models of tumor progression and metastasis, we await robust prospective clinical studies exploring the role of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (cf. inhalational volatiles). Additionally, anti-adrenergic/anti-inflammatory adjuncts, such as lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the anti-adrenergic propranolol warrant ongoing research.

SUMMARY

The biologic perturbation of the perioperative period, compounded by the effects of anesthetic agents, renders patients with cancer particularly vulnerable to enhanced viability of minimal residual disease, with long-term outcome consequences. However, low level and often conflicting clinical evidence equipoise currently exists with regards to optimal oncoanesthesia techniques. Large, prospective, randomized control trials are urgently needed to inform evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

The role of regional anaesthesia in the emerging subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia: a state-of-the-art review

Cancer accounts for millions of deaths globally each year, predominantly due to recurrence and metastatic disease. The majority of patients with primary solid organ cancers require surgery, however, some degree of tumour dissemination related to surgery is inevitable. The surgical stress response and associated immunosuppression, pain, inflammation, tissue hypoxia and angiogenesis have all been implicated in promoting tumour survival, proliferation and recurrence. Regional anaesthesia was hypothesised to reduce the surgical stress response and immunosuppression, minimise the need for volatile anaesthesia and reduce pain and opioid requirements, thus mitigating pro-tumour pathways associated with the peri-operative period and improving long-term oncological outcomes. While some retrospective studies suggested an association between regional anaesthesia and reduced cancer recurrence, the first large randomised controlled trial on the effect of anaesthetic technique on cancer outcome found no significant difference between paravertebral regional anaesthesia and volatile anaesthesia with opioid analgesia in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Randomised controlled trials on the long-term oncological outcomes of regional anaesthesia in other tumour types are ongoing. The focus on how peri-operative interventions, especially regional anaesthesia, during cancer resection surgery, may enhance short-term recovery and perhaps influence long-term outcome has spawned the global emergence of the subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia. This review aims to discuss the most recent evidence on the use of regional anaesthesia in cancer surgery and the significance of its role in onco-anaesthesia.

Impact of anesthesia methods on perioperative systemic inflammation and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis

Background

Recent studies have shown regional anesthesia might improve the survival of cancer patients. We hypothesized that general-epidural anesthesia (GEA) was associated with longer survival than general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) resections.

Methods

A retrospective study included patients who received curative resection for HCC between January 2014 to December 2017. Patients were grouped in GEA vs. GA. After propensity score matching, perioperative inflammatory scores were calculated. Grade of postoperative complications, length of stay (LOS), dosage of sufentanil used and times of patients requiring rescue analgesia in both groups were compared for intraoperative and postoperative parameter. Survival curves were constructed from the date of surgery to death, univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare hazard ratios for death.

Results

A total of 772 patients were included in the study. With 386 patients in GA group and 386 patients in GEA group. After propensity score matching, the demographic and baseline biomarkers in the two groups were similar. Patients in GEA group showed significantly lower inflammatory scores. Grade of postoperative complications, LOS, opioid use, and times of patients requiring rescue analgesia was significantly lower in the GEA group. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rate was significantly lower in the GA group (54.2% vs. 62.3%, 41.2% vs. 52.5%, P<0.001). The multivariate analysis indicated the GA was associated with shorter OS (HR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07–2.02, P<0.001) and DFS (HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03–1.71, P<0.001).

Conclusions

GA combined with epidural anesthesia is associated with lower levels of inflammation, and longer survival in patients undergoing hepatectomy.

Epidural Anesthesia in Liver Surgery-A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of epidural anesthesia (EA) on patients who underwent liver resection.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

This single-center study was conducted at an academic medical center.

METHODS

A subset of 110 1:1 propensity score-matched patients who underwent liver resection with and without EA were analyzed. Outcome measures were pain intensity ≥5 on a numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during movement on postoperative days 1-5, analyzed with logistic mixed-effects models, and postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, length of hospital stay (LOS), and one-year survival. One-year survival in the matched cohorts was compared using a frailty model.

RESULTS

EA patients were less likely to experience NRS ≥5 at rest (odds ratio = 0.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.01 to 0.28, P < 0.001). These findings were independent of age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, baseline NRS, and surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic). The number and severity of postoperative complications and LOS were comparable between groups (P = 0.258, P > 0.999, and P = 0.467, respectively). Reduced mortality rates were seen in the EA group one year after surgery (9.1% vs 30.9%, hazard ratio = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.90, P = 0.031). No EA-related adverse events occurred. Earlier recovery of bowel function was seen in EA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with EA had better postoperative pain control and required fewer systemic opioids. Postoperative complications and LOS did not differ, although one-year survival was significantly improved in patients with EA. EA applied in liver surgery was effective and safe.

Impact of Intraoperative Dexamethasone on Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes for Patients with Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Administration of dexamethasone to mitigate postoperative nausea and vomiting has been suggested to improve short- and long-term outcomes after pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection. This study aimed primarily to evaluate these hypotheses in a contemporary patient cohort treated with multimodality therapy.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic and perioperative characteristics of consecutive resected PDAC patients (July 2011 to October 2018) were analyzed from a prospectively maintained database. Intraoperative administration of dexamethasone (4-10 mg) was retrospectively abstracted from the electronic medical record.

RESULTS

The majority of 373 patients (59.8%) received intraoperative dexamethasone. Most of these patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy (75.3%), were potentially resectable at presentation (69.7%), and underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (79.9%). Women were more likely to receive dexamethasone than men (69.9 vs 30.1%; p < 0.001). The cohorts were otherwise clinically similar. Intraoperative dexamethasone was not associated with differences in postoperative major complications (PMCs) (21.1 vs 19.3%; p = 0.68), postoperative pancreatic fistulas (6.3 vs 6.7%; p = 0.88), or composite infectious complications (28.7 vs 24.7%; p = 0.39). Dexamethasone was not associated with any improvement in median recurrence-free survival (RFS) (17 vs 17 months; p = 0.99) or overall survival (OS) (46 vs 43 months; p = 0.90). After adjustment for clinical factors including margin status, clinical classification, tumor size, and dexamethasone, the only factors independently associated with OS were pathologic node-positivity (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.47), perineural invasion (HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.23-3.31), multimodality therapy (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.70), and PMCs (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.17-2.29) (all p < 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone failed to demonstrate any protective advantage in terms of mitigating short-term PMCs or infectious complications, or to confer any long-term survival benefit. Tumor biology, multimodality therapy, and PMCs remain the main prognostic factors after PDAC resection.

Study on the prevention of infection in terminal cancer patients applying epidural analgesia by adding cefazolin to anesthetics: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To observe the antibacterial effect of adding cefazolin into anesthetics in patients with terminal cancer undergoing long-term epidural analgesia.

METHODS

Patients undergoing epidural analgesia with terminal cancer were randomly divided into two groups: the conventional drug group (group C) and the cefazolin group (group G). Both groups were given levobupivacaine and morphine, while cefazolin was added to group G. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rates (R), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, satisfaction and complications of patients in the two groups were observed. 3 ml of the used analgesic was taken for bacterial culture when replacing the new analgesic case.

RESULTS

HR, MAP, R, VAS scores, dosages of morphine, satisfaction of the analgesic and the complications were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). The overall satisfaction of patients in group G was significantly higher than that in group C (P < 0.05). One patient's anesthetics in group C were infected with colibacillus. Four patients in group C got infected in their epidural puncture sites. There was no infection in group G (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Adding cefazolin to local anesthetics could effectively prevent bacterial infection and ensured the safety of epidural analgesia for patients with terminal cancer.

Anesthesia Options and the Recurrence of Cancer: What We Know so Far?

Surgery is a critical period in the survival of patients with cancer. While resective surgery of primary tumors has shown to prolong the life of these patients, it can also promote mechanisms associated with metastatic progression. During surgery, patients require general and sometimes local anesthetics that also modulate mechanisms that can favor or reduce metastasis. In this narrative review, we summarized the evidence about the impact of local, regional and general anesthesia on metastatic mechanisms and the survival of patients. The available evidence suggests that cancer recurrence is not significantly impacted by neither regional anesthesia nor volatile or total intravenous anesthesia.

Effects of epidural combined with general anesthesia versus general anesthesia alone in gastric cancer surgery: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted retrospectively to investigate the survival of patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery with epidural combined with general anesthesia (EGA) and general anesthesia alone (GA).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 596 patients with gastric cancer who were scheduled for radical resection. Propensity score matching was performed at a 1:1 ratio between GA (n=97) and EGA (n=97) to reduce selection bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors significantly correlated with recurrence and/or metastasis and prognosis. The 5-year overall survival rates of patients receiving EGA and GA alone were compared.

RESULTS

After the propensity scores were matched, there were 97 patients who underwent EGA and 97 patients who underwent GA. For the entire population, reconstruction type, pN stage, and complications were significantly correlated with prognosis based on multivariate analyses. For patients with a recurrence and/or metastasis, lymphadenectomy and pN stage were shown to be independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, patients might benefit from EGA as a result of better analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, fewer postoperative complications, higher safety, and a lower rate of metastasis and recurrence is conducive to postoperative recovery in patients with gastric cancer.

Anesthesia and brain tumor surgery: technical considerations based on current research evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anesthetics may influence cancer recurrence and metastasis following surgery by modulating the neuroendocrine stress response or by directly affecting cancer cell biology. This review summarizes the current evidence on whether commonly used anesthetics potentially affect postoperative outcomes following solid organ cancer surgery with particular focus on neurological malignancies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite significant improvement in diagnostic and therapeutic technology over the past decades, mortality rates after cancer surgery (including brain tumor resection) remains high. With regards to brain tumors, interaction between microglia/macrophages and tumor cells by multiple biological factors play an important role in tumor progression and metastasis. Preclinical studies have demonstrated an association between anesthetics and brain tumor cell biology, and a potential effect on tumor progression and metastasis has been revealed. However, in the clinical setting, the current evidence is inadequate to draw firm conclusions on the optimal anesthetic technique for brain tumor surgery.

SUMMARY

Further work at both the basic science and clinical level is urgently needed to evaluate the association between perioperative factors, including anesthetics/technique, and postoperative brain tumor outcomes.

The role of regional anesthesia in the propagation of cancer: A comprehensive review

New cancer incidences worldwide will eclipse 18 million in 2019, with nearly 10 million cancer-related deaths. It is estimated that in the United States, almost 40% of individuals will be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime. Surgical resection of primary tumors remains a cornerstone of cancer treatment; however, the surgical process can trigger an immune-suppressing sympathetic response, which promotes tumor growth of any residual cancerous cells post surgery. Regional and local anesthesia have become staples of anesthesia and analgesia during and after surgery. Recently, much evidence in the form of retrospective and prospective studies has come to light regarding the protective, antitumor properties of anesthetic and analgesic agents across a wide variety of cancers and patient demographics. It is believed that by blocking afferent pain signals, the body does not mount the sympathetic response that contributes to the perpetuation of disease after surgical treatment. This review, therefore, investigates these studies as they pertain to the treatment and outcomes of cancers treated surgically to elucidate the role of regional anesthesia in the propagation of cancer.

Influence of perioperative anaesthetic and analgesic interventions on oncological outcomes: a narrative review

Surgery is an important treatment modality for the majority of solid organ cancers. Unfortunately, cancer recurrence following surgery of curative intent is common, and typically results in refractory disease and patient death. Surgery and other perioperative interventions induce a biological state conducive to the survival and growth of residual cancer cells released from the primary tumour intraoperatively, which may influence the risk of a subsequent metastatic disease. Evidence is accumulating that anaesthetic and analgesic interventions could affect many of these pathophysiological processes, influencing risk of cancer recurrence in either a beneficial or detrimental way. Much of this evidence is from experimental in vitro and in vivo models, with clinical evidence largely limited to retrospective observational studies or post hoc analysis of RCTs originally designed to evaluate non-cancer outcomes. This narrative review summarises the current state of evidence regarding the potential effect of perioperative anaesthetic and analgesic interventions on cancer biology and clinical outcomes. Proving a causal link will require data from prospective RCTs with oncological outcomes as primary endpoints, a number of which will report in the coming years. Until then, there is insufficient evidence to recommend any particular anaesthetic or analgesic technique for patients undergoing tumour resection surgery on the basis that it might alter the risk of recurrence or metastasis.

Impact of epidural analgesia on the systemic biomarker response after hepatic resection

Background

Perioperative inflammation is associated with poor oncologic outcomes. Regional analgesia has been shown mitigate some of these inflammatory changes and be associated with better oncologic outcomes in patients with hepatic malignancies. The mechanism for this effect, however, remains unclear. The authors sought to compare systemic biomarker concentrations in a comprehensive and oncologically relevant panel in the perioperative setting between patients undergoing thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and intra-venous patient- controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) for resection of hepatic metastatic disease.

Results

Clinicopathologic variables and baseline biomarkers were similar between TEA (n = 46) and IV-PCA (n = 16) groups. Of the biomarkers which were significantly changed from baseline, there was a lower fold change from baseline in the TEA patients compared to IV-PCA including IL-6 (13.5vs19.1), MCP-1 (1.9vs3.0), IL-8 (2.4vs3.0), and Pentraxin-3 (10.8vs15.6). Overall decreased systemic concentrations of TGFb signaling were noted in TEA patients on POD1 TGFb3 (243.2 vs. 86.0, p = 0.005), POD3 TGFb1 (6558.0 vs. 2063.3, p = 0.004), POD3 TGFb2 (468.3 vs. 368.9, p = 0.036), POD3 TGFb3 (132.2 vs. 77.8, p = 0.028), and POD5 TGFb3 (306.5 vs. 92.2, p = 0.032). POD1 IL-12p70 concentrations were significantly higher in TEA patients (8.3 vs. 1.6, p = 0.024).

Conclusion

Epidural analgesia damped the postoperative inflammatory response and systemic immunosuppressive signaling, as well as promoted Th1 systemic signaling early in the post-operative period after hepatic resection for metastatic disease. These differences elaborate on known mechanisms for improved oncologic outcomes with regional anesthesia, and may be considered for biomarker monitoring of effective regional anesthesia in oncologic surgery.

Materials and Methods

Patient data, including clinicopathologic variables were collected for this study from the database of a randomized controlled trial comparing perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing hepatic resection with TEA vs. IV-PCA. Patients undergoing resection for metastatic disease were selected for this study. Plasma concentrations (pg/mL) of well-studied biomarkers (IL-1b/2/4/5/6/7/8/10/12p70/13/17, MCP-1 IFNγ, TNFα, MIP-1b, GM-CSF, G-CSF, VEGF, Resistin, TGFb1, TGFb2, and TGFb3), as well as novel perioperative markers (CXCL12, CXCL10, Omentin-1, sLeptin R, Vaspin, Pentraxin-3, Galactin-3, FGF-23, PON-1, FGF-21) were measured preoperatively, and on postoperative day (POD)1, POD3, and POD5 using multiplex bead assays. Clinicopathologic variables and perioperative variations in these biomarkers were compared between TEA vs IV-PCA groups.

Determining the Safety and Efficacy of Enhanced Recovery Protocols in Major Oncologic Surgery: An Institutional NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced-recovery (ER) protocols are increasingly being utilized in surgical practice. Outside of colorectal surgery, however, their feasibility, safety, and efficacy in major oncologic surgery have not been proven. This study compared patient outcomes before and after multispecialty implementation of ER protocols at a large, comprehensive cancer center.

METHODS

Surgical cases performed from 2011 to 2016 and captured by an institutional NSQIP database were reviewed. Following exclusion of outpatient and emergent surgeries, 2747 cases were included in the analyses. Cases were stratified by presence or absence of ER compliance, defined by preoperative patient education and electronic medical record order set-driven opioid-sparing analgesia, goal-directed fluid therapy, and early postoperative diet advancement and ambulation.

RESULTS

Approximately half of patients were treated on ER protocols (46%) and the remaining on traditional postoperative (TP) protocols (54%). Treatment on an ER protocol was associated with decreased overall complication rates (20% vs. 33%, p < 0.0001), severe complication rates (7.4% vs. 10%, p = 0.010), and median hospital length of stay (4 vs. 5 days, p < 0.0001). There was no change in readmission rates (ER vs. TP, 8.6% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.701). Subanalyses of high magnitude cases and specialty-specific outcomes consistently demonstrated improved outcomes with ER protocol adherence, including decreased opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

This assessment of a large-scale ER implementation in multispecialty major oncologic surgery indicates its feasibility, safety, and efficacy. Future efforts should be directed toward defining the long-term oncologic benefits of these protocols.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Hepatobiliary

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways target specific areas within perioperative patient care in a multidisciplinary and evidence-based manner. Because of the subsequent positive outcomes associated with its use, ERAS has expanded to most surgical subspecialties, including hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. Although certain concepts are universal to all ERAS protocols, there are unique areas of emphasis pertaining to the hepatopancreatobiliary specialties, which will be highlighted throughout this article. In addition, some of the less frequently discussed aspects of enhanced recovery, including patient-reported outcomes, recovery assessment, cost, and auditing, will be addressed.

The effect of epidural analgesia on cancer progression in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer after primary tumor resection: A retrospective cohort study

Retrospective clinical studies showed perioperative epidural analgesia (EA) was associated with better postoperative oncologic outcomes in patients with specific types of non-metastatic cancers. This study aimed to investigate the effects of EA on cancer prognosis after surgical intervention for stage IV colorectal cancer. In this retrospective study, patients with stage IV colorectal cancer undergoing primary tumor resection and metastasectomy between January 2005 and December 2014 were classified into two groups based on their use of perioperative EA or not and evaluated through August 2016. Primary and secondary endpoints were postoperative progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively. A total of 999 patients were included and 165 (16.5%) of them received EA. The median follow-up interval was 17.5 months and no significant difference in PFS or OS was noted between the EA and non-EA groups in the univariate analysis. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model identified four independent risk factors both for disease progression and mortality, including American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status ≥ 3, higher pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), multiple distant metastases, and pathologic lymphovascular invasion. After adjustment for the selected risk factors, the effects of EA on PFS and OS remained non-significant (hazard ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.29, for PFS and 0.90, 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.20 for OS). Similar findings were demonstrated by propensity score analysis. Our results did not support the association between perioperative epidural analgesia and better progression-free or overall survival in patients following stage IV colorectal cancer surgery.

Regional anesthesia and analgesia in cancer care: is it time to break the bad news?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is ongoing controversy regarding the tumor-protective effects of regional anesthesia in patients undergoing cancer surgery. Evidence of up-to-date systematic reviews will be presented alongside recent updates on the effects of opioids and local anesthetics.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, the literature regarding the effects of regional anesthesia techniques on cancer recurrence has raised many unanswered questions. Ongoing randomized controlled trials may not be able to shed light on the controversial discussion regarding the tumor protective effects of regional anesthesia because the expected effect size and event rate in those studies may be overstated.Recent more refined animal data, provides no evidence to suggest that opioids promote cancer recurrence or facilitate the development of metastatic disease.In addition, local anesthetics have promising preclinical anticarcinogenic effects that extend beyond their voltage-gated sodium channel blocking properties and could be of therapeutic value.

SUMMARY

Cancer recurrence in patients undergoing surgery remains a global burden. Current evidence suggests that regional techniques, opioid analgesia and local anesthetics in onco-anesthesia may require a tailored individual approach due to the phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity within and between different tumors. The authors surmise that future or ongoing randomized controlled trials regarding regional anesthesia techniques and cancer outcome may not be able to reproduce clear results, as it will be challenging to prove the efficacy of one single intervention (e.g. regional anesthesia) in an otherwise complex multifactorial perioperative oncological setting.

Impact of perioperative blood transfusion on clinical outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastasis after hepatectomy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Perioperative blood transfusion may be associated with negative clinical outcomes in oncological surgery. A meta-analysis of published studies was conducted to evaluate the impact of blood transfusion on short- and long-term outcomes following liver resection of colorectal liver metastasis (CLM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search was performed to identify relevant articles. Data were pooled for meta-analysis using Review Manager version 5.3.

RESULTS

Twenty-five observational studies containing 10621 patients were subjected to the analysis. Compared with non-transfused patients, transfused patients experienced higher overall morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 1.98; 95% confidence intervals [CI] =1.49-2.33), more major complications (OR, 2.12; 95% CI =1.26-3.58), higher mortality (OR, 4.13; 95% CI =1.96-8.72), and longer length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, 4.43; 95% CI =1.15-7.69). Transfusion was associated with reduced overall survival (risk ratio [RR], 1.24, 95% CI =1.11-1.38) and disease-free survival (RR, 1.38, 95% CI=1.23-1.56).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative blood transfusion has a detrimental impact on the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing CLM resection.

The NAPRESSIM trial: the use of low-dose, prophylactic naloxone infusion to prevent respiratory depression with intrathecally administered morphine in elective hepatobiliary surgery: a study protocol and statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Intrathecally administered morphine is effective as part of a postoperative analgesia regimen following major hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery. However, the potential for postoperative respiratory depression at the doses required for effective analgesia currently limits its clinical use. The use of a low-dose, prophylactic naloxone infusion following intrathecally administered morphine may significantly reduce postoperative respiratory depression. The NAPRESSIM trial aims to answer this question.

METHODS/DESIGN

'The use of low-dose, prophylactic naloxone infusion to prevent respiratory depression with intrathecally administered morphine' trial is an investigator-led, single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-arm comparator study. The trial will recruit 96 patients aged > 18 years, undergoing major open hepatopancreaticobiliary resections, who are receiving intrathecally administered morphine as part of a standard anaesthetic regimen. It aims to investigate whether the prophylactic administration of naloxone via intravenous infusion compared to placebo will reduce the proportion of episodes of respiratory depression in this cohort of patients. Trial patients will receive an infusion of naloxone or placebo, commenced within 1 h of postoperative extubation continued until the first postoperative morning. The primary outcome is the rate of respiratory depression in the intervention group as compared to the placebo group. Secondary outcomes include pain scores, rates of nausea and vomiting, pruritus, sedation scores and adverse outcomes. We will also employ a novel, non-invasive, respiratory minute volume monitor (ExSpiron 1Xi, Respiratory Motion, Inc., 411 Waverley Oaks Road, Building 1, Suite 150, Waltham, MA, USA) to assess the monitor's accuracy for detecting respiratory depression.

DISCUSSION

The trial aims to provide a clear management plan to prevent respiratory depression after the intrathecal administration of morphine, and thereby improve patient safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02885948 . Registered retrospectively on 4 July 2016. Protocol Version 2.0, 3 April 2017. Protocol identification (code or reference number): UCDCRC/15/006 EudraCT registration number: 2015-003504-22. Registered on 5 August 2015.

Effect of postoperative analgesia technique on the prognosis of gastric cancer: a retrospective analysis

Background

Whether regional analgesia techniques have favorable impact on prognosis after cancer surgery is unclear, and existing reports show controversial results. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare recurrence and mortality between patients that received either intravenous (IV) or epidural patient controlled analgesia (PCA) for pain control after curative surgery for gastric cancer.

Materials and methods

Medical records of patients that underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer between November 2005 and December 2010 were reviewed. Identified patients were categorized according to the use of IV or epidural PCA for postoperative analgesia. Demographic and perioperative variables including type of PCA were analyzed by univariate and multiple regression analysis to investigate any association with recurrence and mortality after surgery. Propensity score matching was done to adjust for selection bias.

Results

Of the 3,799 patients included in this analysis, 374 and 3, 425 patients received IV and epidural PCAs, respectively. No difference in recurrence (HR, 1.092; 95% CI 0.859 to 1.388; P = 0.471) or mortality (HR, 0.695; 95% CI 0.429 to 1.125; P = 0.138) was identified between the use of IV and epidural PCA. Propensity score matching also showed no difference in recurrence (HR, 1.098; 95% CI 0.756 to 1.596; P = 0.623) or mortality (HR, 0.855; 95% CI 0.391 to 1.869; P = 0.695) between the two groups.

Conclusions

Postoperative use of epidural analgesia was not found to be associated with reduced recurrence or mortality after curative surgery in gastric cancer patients. This finding needs to be confirmed with prospective studies in the future.

Anesthetic technique and cancer recurrence in oncologic surgery: unraveling the puzzle

Surgery/anesthetic technique-stimulated immunosuppression in the perioperative period might cause an increase in cancer-related mortality. Whether anesthetic technique can affect the outcomes of cancer patients remains inconclusive. This review discusses data from the available literature on anesthetic techniques applied in oncologic surgery, the long-term outcomes of anesthetic technique, and their relation to survival and cancer recurrence. Searches of the PubMed database up to June 30, 2016, were conducted to identify publications with the terms "anesthetic technique and cancer recurrence," "regional anesthesia and cancer recurrence," "local anesthesia and cancer recurrence," "anesthetic technique and immunosuppression," and "anesthetic technique and oncologic surgery." Surgery/anesthesia-stimulated activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) provides immunosuppression through several soluble factors. Volatile anesthetics and opioids suppress cell-mediated immunity (CMI) and promote the proliferation of cancer cells and angiogenesis, whereas propofol does not suppress CMI and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. Regional anesthesia (RA) protects CMI and diminishes the surgical neuroendocrine stress response by blocking afferent neural transmission that stimulates the HPA axis and SNS, decreasing the requirement for opioids and volatile anesthetics and thereby decreasing cancer recurrence. Preclinical and retrospective studies highlight a potential benefit of anesthetic technique in reducing cancer-related mortality and recurrence by attenuating immunosuppression following surgical treatment in patients with specific types of cancer. Several well-planned, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are underway that may provide more conclusive and definitive results regarding the benefits of anesthetic technique on survival in oncologic surgery.

Comparison of the effect of spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia on 5-year tumor recurrence rates after transurethral resection of bladder tumors

Non-muscle invasive bladder tumors are early-stage tumors with high recurrence rates. Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURB) is performed under spinal or general anesthesia; however, the effect of the two anesthetic techniques on non-muscle invasive bladder tumor recurrence is unknown. Thus, we compared their effects on tumor recurrence rates five years after TURB. Data from 876 patients who underwent TURB from 2000 to 2007 was reviewed. Patients received spinal or general anesthesia based on their choice or the clinician's preference. Tumor recurrence five years after TURB was assessed using multivariate Cox regression model, propensity score analysis (matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting), and Kaplan–Meier method. The five-year tumor recurrence rate after TURB was 42% and 53% for spinal and general anesthesia groups, respectively (P = 0.013). Hazard ratios for tumor recurrence in the spinal anesthesia group compared to that in the general anesthesia group were 0.619 (P <0.001), 0.642 (P = 0.001), and 0.636 (P <0.001) in the Cox regression model, Cox regression model with propensity score matching, and adjusted analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting, respectively. The five-year tumor recurrence rate was significantly lower in the spinal anesthesia group than in the general anesthesia group in both the unadjusted (P = 0.002) and adjusted Kaplan–Meier curves (P <0.001). Therefore, spinal anesthesia for non-muscle invasive bladder tumor resection was associated with a lower five-year tumor recurrence rate than general anesthesia. This finding provides useful information for an appropriate selection of anesthetic technique for TURB.

Effects of epidural analgesia on recovery after open colorectal surgery

The use of epidural analgesia (EA) has been suggested as an integral part of an enhanced recovery program for colorectal surgery. However, the effects of EA on postoperative outcomes and hospital length of stay remain controversial. Data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for 2014 and 2015 were queried for adult patients who underwent elective open colorectal surgery. We included only cases with general anesthesia as the main anesthetic. Cases with other types of anesthesia were excluded. A 1:3 matched sample of EA versus non-EA cases was created based on propensity scores. The primary outcome of interest was the occurrence of major cardiopulmonary complications within 7 days of the surgery. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality. A total of 24,927 patients were included in the analysis. EA was utilized in 15.02% (n = 3745). The cumulative risk over the study period for major cardiopulmonary complications was 2.52% (n = 627). There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of postoperative complications (relative risk 0.91, 95% CI 0.66-1.27, P = 0.59), length of stay (median [interquartile range], EA 6 [5-9] versus non-EA 6 [4-9] days, P = 0.36), and 30-day mortality rate (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.42-1.20, P = 0.20) between the two propensity-matched cohorts. In conclusion, our study revealed that the benefits of EA in patients undergoing open colorectal surgery are limited, as it does not influence immediate postoperative cardiopulmonary complications or hospital length of stay.

Epidural anesthesia and analgesia in liver resection: Safety and effectiveness

OBJECTIVES

Perioperative epidural analgesia in liver resection provides optimal dynamic pain relief. Coagulation disorders occurring in the postoperative period can lead to greater risk of complications during epidural catheter removal. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and complications of epidural analgesia and delayed epidural catheter removal due to postoperative coagulopathy.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 114 patients undergoing open liver resection and epidural analgesia, from March 2012 to February 2015. Postoperative course of pain intensity, coagulation parameters and delayed catheter removal was analyzed RESULTS: Of the 114 operated patients, 73 met the inclusion criteria. 59% of patients received major hepatectomy (resection ≥ 3 segments) and 15% had Child's Class A cirrhosis (11/73). 96% of catheters functioned properly. 89% of patients had controlled pain (numerical rate scale <3) at rest and 8.2% (6 patients) had severe pain (numerical rate scale > 6) with movement. The INR peaked on postoperative day 2, 1.41 [0.99-2.30], and gradually returned to normal values in most patients by postoperative day 4, 1.26 [0.90 - 2.20]. The catheters were left in place 3.6 (± 1.1) days. In 6 patients (8%), catheter removal was postponed due to coagulation disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Epidural analgesia for liver resection was a safe practice, which produced optimal control of postoperative pain. The percentage of delayed catheter removal due to postoperative coagulopathy was low, not requiring transfusion of blood products.