The choice of anaesthetic--sevoflurane or propofol--and outcome from cancer surgery: a retrospective analysis

Influence of Anesthetic Techniques on Colorectal Cancer Recurrence: A Comprehensive Review

Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide, with a significant risk of recurrence following surgical treatment. Emerging evidence suggests that perioperative factors, particularly anesthetic techniques, may influence cancer recurrence rates. This comprehensive review aims to critically analyze the impact of various anesthetic techniques on colorectal cancer recurrence. We explore the distinct immunomodulatory and inflammatory effects of general, regional, and combined anesthetic approaches and their potential influence on tumor biology. The review synthesizes findings from clinical studies, experimental research, and theoretical models, highlighting the differential impact of anesthetic choices on long-term oncological outcomes. By examining recurrence rates, immune responses, and inflammatory markers associated with different anesthetic techniques, this review provides a holistic understanding of the role of anesthetic management in colorectal cancer surgery. Our findings suggest that anesthetic techniques can modulate the immune and inflammatory responses in ways that may affect tumor recurrence, underscoring the need for further research to optimize anesthetic protocols. The review offers clinical recommendations based on current evidence and identifies gaps in knowledge, proposing directions for future investigations. This comprehensive analysis aims to inform clinical practice and guide future research, ultimately improving long-term outcomes for colorectal cancer patients.

Survival benefits of propofol-based versus inhalational anesthesia in non-metastatic breast cancer patients: a comprehensive meta-analysis

Whether the anesthesia technique, inhalational general anesthesia (IGA) or propofol-based anesthesia (PBA), influences the long-term survival of non-metastatic breast cancer (eBC) remain unclear and controversial. We carried out a literature search on 16thJuly, 2022 for studies comparing IGA and PBA in eBC undergoing standard surgery, according to PRISMA 2020. The major endpoint in our study was overall survival (OS). Seventeen studies including four randomized clinical trials and thirteen retrospective cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. Ten studies provided data for crude OS in unweighted eBC patients (imbalance in baseline characteristics). The summarized estimate HRs of the PBA group versus the IGA group (ten studies, N = 127,774, IGA group: 92,592, PBA group: 35,182.) was 0.83 (95%CI: 0.78-0.89). Compared with IGA, PBA was associated with both better 1-year OS (two studies, N = 104,083, IGA group: 84,074, PBA group: 20,009. Pooled HR = 0.80, 0.73-0.89) and 5-year OS (six studies, N = 121,580, IGA group: 89,472, PBA group: 32,108. HR = 0.80, 0.74-0.87). Ten studies applied PSM method to balance the baseline characteristics. In these weighted patients, PBA still showed a better OS (ten studies, N = 105,459, IGA group: 79,095, PBA group: 26,364. HR = 0.93, 0.87-1.00), a better 1-year OS (two studies, N = 83,007, IGA group: 67,609, PBA group: 15,398. HR = 0.88, 0.78-0.98) and a trend towards a better 5-year OS (nine studies, N = 121,580, IGA group: 76,797, PBA group: 24,066. HR = 0.95, 0.88-1.03). Loco-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) was also better in PBA group (HR = 0.73, 0.61-0.86). The present study is the first comprehensive meta-analysis to demonstrate that propofol-based anesthesia could significantly improve OS and LRRFS in non-metastatic breast cancer patients, compared with inhalational anesthesia.

Perioperative Immunosuppressive Factors during Cancer Surgery: An Updated Review

Surgical excision of the primary tumor represents the most frequent and curative procedure for solid malignancies. Compelling evidence suggests that, despite its beneficial effects, surgery may impair immunosurveillance by triggering an immunosuppressive inflammatory stress response and favor recurrence by stimulating minimal residual disease. In addition, many factors interfere with the immune effectors before and after cancer procedures, such as malnutrition, anemia, or subsequent transfusion. Thus, the perioperative period plays a key role in determining oncological outcomes and represents a short phase to circumvent anesthetic and surgical deleterious factors by supporting the immune system through the use of synergistic pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. In line with this, accumulating studies indicate that anesthetic agents could drive both protumor or antitumor signaling pathways during or after cancer surgery. While preclinical investigations focusing on anesthetics' impact on the behavior of cancer cells are quite convincing, limited clinical trials studying the consequences on survival and recurrences remain inconclusive. Herein, we highlight the main factors occurring during the perioperative period of cancer surgery and their potential impact on immunomodulation and cancer progression. We also discuss patient management prior to and during surgery, taking into consideration the latest advances in the literature.

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.

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.

General anaesthetics reduce acute lymphoblastic leukaemia malignancies in vitro and in vivovia CXCR4 and osteopontin mediated mechanisms

Background

Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is a common type of cancer in children. General anaesthetics are often used on patients undergoing painful procedures during ALL treatments but their effects on ALL malignancy remain unknown. Herein, we aim to study the effect of propofol and sevoflurane on the migration, homing and chemoresistance of ALL cells.

Methods

NALM-6 and Reh cells were treated with propofol (5 and 10 μg/ml) or sevoflurane (3.6%) in vitro for six hours. Then, cells were harvested for adhesion assay and migration assay in vitro. In in vivo experiments, GFP-NALM-6 cells were pre-treated with propofol (10 μg/ml) or sevoflurane (3.6%) for six hours. Then, cells were injected intravenously to C57BL/6 female mice followed by intravital microscopy. For chemoresistance study, cells were treated with rising concentrations of Ara-c (0.05-50 nM) plus 10μg/ml of propofol or Ara-C plus 3.6% of sevoflurane for 4 hours, followed by the assessment of cell viability via CCK-8 assay and detection of autophagy via flow cytometry.

Results

Both anaesthetics reduced in vivo migration and in vivo homing as exemplified by 1) the reduction in the number of cells entering the bone marrow and 2) the disturbance in homing location in relation to endosteal surface. Our results indicated that general anaesthetics reduced the surface CXCR4 expression and the adhesion of leukaemia cells to thrombin cleaved osteopontin (OPN) was reduced. Those changes might result in the alterations in migration and homing. In addition, both anaesthetics sensitised ALL cells to Ara-c possibly through CXCR4 mediated mechanisms. Propofol but not sevoflurane enhanced chemo-related cell death via inducing cytotoxic autophagy.

Conclusion

Together, our data suggest that both propofol and sevoflurane could reduce ALL migration, and homing in vivo and in vitro via CXCR4 and OPN mediated mechanisms. Both anaesthetics could sensitise ALL cells to chemotherapy possibly via CXCR4 mediated mechanisms.

Impact of anesthesia on postoperative breast cancer prognosis: A narrative review

The incidence of breast cancer has exhibited an annually increasing trend, and the disease has become the most common malignant tumour worldwide. Currently, the primary treatment for breast cancer is surgical resection. However, metastatic recurrence is the main cause of cancer-related death in this patient population. Various factors are associated with breast cancer prognosis, and anaesthesia-induced changes in the tumour microenvironment have attracted increasing attention. To date, however, it remains unclear whether anaesthetic drugs have a positive or negative impact on cancer outcomes after surgery. The present article reviews the effects of different anaesthetics on the postoperative prognosis of breast cancer surgery to guide the choice of anaesthetic technique(s) and agents for such patients.

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.

Effects of remifentanil combined with propofol on hemodynamics and oxidative stress in patients undergoing resection of rectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Rectal carcinoma (RC) treatment primarily involves laparoscopic surgery, which may induce significant hemodynamic changes and weaken immune function. Certain anesthetic approaches using opioid drugs (including remifentanil and sufentanil) pose risks, such as hypotension.

AIM

To determine the effects of remifentanil combined with propofol on hemodynamics and oxidative stress in patients undergoing RC resection.

METHODS

A total of 211 patients one hundred and four patients with RC treated at the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University between November 2018 and November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, the remifentanil group included 45 patients receiving remifentanil with propofol anesthesia and the sufentanil group included 59 patients receiving sufentanil with propofol anesthesia. Changes in the hemodynamic index, oxidative stress index, general data, consumption of remifentanil, and use of vasoactive drugs were compared. The incidences of adverse reactions were calculated.

RESULTS

The two groups did not significantly differ in terms of operation, anesthesia, and extubation times (P > 0.05). At 1 min after intubation, the sufentanil group showed a notably higher heart rate, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure (MAP) compared with the remifentanil group (P < 0.05), whereas the sufentanil group showed a notably higher SBP and MAP compared with the remifentanil group at 5 min after pneumoperitoneum (P < 0.05). Thirty minutes after surgery, the remifentanil group showed significantly lower plasma cortisol, noradrenaline, and glucose levels than the sufentanil group (P < 0.001). The remifentanil group consumed significantly less remifentanil than the sufentanil group (P < 0.05), and the adoption frequency of ephedrine was lower in the remifentanil group than that in the sufentanil group (P < 0.05). The incidence of hypotension was notably higher in the sufentanil group than that in the remifentanil group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Remifentanil combined with propofol can improve hemodynamics and relieve oxidative stress in patients undergoing RC resection.

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.

Type of anesthesia for cancer resection surgery: No differential impact on cancer recurrence in mouse models of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgery is essential for curative treatment of solid tumors. Evidence from recent retrospective clinical analyses suggests that use of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia during cancer resection surgery is associated with improved overall survival compared to inhaled volatile anesthesia. Evaluating these findings in prospective clinical studies is required to inform definitive clinical guidelines but will take many years and requires biomarkers to monitor treatment effect. Therefore, we examined the effect of different anesthetic agents on cancer recurrence in mouse models of breast cancer with the overarching goal of evaluating plausible mechanisms that could be used as biomarkers of treatment response.

METHODS

To test the hypothesis that volatile anesthesia accelerates breast cancer recurrence after surgical resection of the primary tumor, we used three mouse models of breast cancer. We compared volatile sevoflurane anesthesia with intravenous propofol anesthesia and used serial non-invasive bioluminescent imaging to track primary tumor recurrence and metastatic recurrence. To determine short-term perioperative effects, we evaluated the effect of anesthesia on vascular integrity and immune cell changes after surgery in animal models.

RESULTS

Survival analyses found that the kinetics of cancer recurrence and impact on survival were similar regardless of the anesthetic agent used during cancer surgery. Vascular permeability, immune cell infiltration and cytokine profiles showed no statistical difference after resection with inhaled sevoflurane or intravenous propofol anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

These preclinical studies found no evidence that choice of anesthetic agent used during cancer resection surgery affected either short-term perioperative events or long-term cancer outcomes in mouse models of breast cancer. These findings raise the possibility that mouse models do not recapitulate perioperative events in cancer patients. Nonetheless, the findings suggest that future evaluation of effects of anesthesia on cancer outcomes should focus on cancer types other than breast cancer.

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.

Sevoflurane but not propofol enhances ovarian cancer cell biology through regulating cellular metabolic and signaling mechanisms

Perioperative risk factors, including the choice of anesthetics, may influence ovarian cancer recurrence after surgery. Inhalational anesthetic sevoflurane and intravenous agent propofol might affect cancer cell metabolism and signaling, which, in turn, may influence the malignancy of ovarian cancer cells. The different effects between sevoflurane and propofol on ovarian cancer cell biology and underlying mechanisms were studied. Cultured ovarian cancer cells were exposed to 2.5% sevoflurane, 4 μg/mL propofol, or sham condition as the control for 2 h followed by 24-h recovery. Glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1), mitochondrial pyruvate carrier 1 (MPC1), glutamate dehydrogenase 1 (GLUD1), pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF), p-Erk1/2, and hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha (HIF-1α) expressions were determined with immunostaining and/or Western blot. Cultured media were collected for 1H-NMR spectroscopy-based metabolomics analysis. Principal component analysis (PCA) and orthogonal projections to latent structures discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) were used to analyze metabolomics data. Sevoflurane increased the GLUT1, MPC1, GLUD1, p-Erk1/2, and HIF-1α expressions but decreased the PEDF expression relative to the controls. In contrast to sevoflurane, propofol decreased GLUT1, MPC1, GLUD1, p-Erk1/2, and HIF-1α but increased PEDF expression. Sevoflurane increased metabolite isopropanol and decreased glucose and glutamine energy substrates in the media, but the opposite changes were found after propofol treatment. Our data indicated that, unlike the pro-tumor property of sevoflurane, propofol negatively modulated PEDF/Erk/HIF-1α cellular signaling pathway and inhibited ovarian cancer metabolic efficiency and survival, and hence decreased malignancy. The translational value of this work warrants further study. • Sevoflurane promoted but propofol inhibited ovarian cancer cell biology. • Sevoflurane upregulated but propofol downregulated the GLUT1, MPC1, and GLUD1 expressions of ovarian cancer cells. • Sevoflurane enhanced but propofol inhibited ovarian cancer cellular glucose. metabolism and glutaminolysis. • Sevoflurane downregulated PEDF but upregulated the Erk pathway and HIF-1α, while propofol had the adverse effects on ovarian cancer cells.

The Role of Anesthetic Drugs and Statins in Prostate Cancer Recurrence: Starting at the Actual Knowledge and Walking through a New Paradigm

Prostate cancer has become a major health problem in men. Its incidence is increasing as the average age of the affected population tends to be higher. Of all the possible treatments, surgery is the gold standard in its treatment. Surgery produces a deregulation in the immune system that can favour the development of distant metastases. Different anesthetic techniques have raised the hypothesis that different anesthetic drugs influence tumor recurrence and prognosis. Some mechanisms are beginning to be understood by which halogenated agents in cancer patients and the use of opioids may negatively affect patients. In this document, we group together all the available evidence on how the different anesthetic drugs affect tumor recurrence in prostate cancer.

Impact of general anaesthesia on breast cancer survival: a 5-year follow up of a pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial, the CAN-study, comparing propofol and sevoflurane

Background

Anaesthesia may impact long-term cancer survival. In the Cancer and Anaesthesia study, we hypothesised that the hypnotic drug propofol will have an advantage of at least five percentage points in five-year survival over the inhalational anaesthetic sevoflurane for breast cancer surgery.

Methods

From 2118 eligible breast cancer patients scheduled for primary curable, invasive breast cancer surgery, 1764 were recruited after ethical approval and individual informed consent to this open label, single-blind, randomised trial at four county- and three university hospitals in Sweden and one Chinese university hospital. Of surveyed patients, 354 were excluded, mainly due to refusal to participate. Patients were randomised by computer at the monitoring organisation to general anaesthesia maintenance with either intravenous propofol or inhaled sevoflurane in a 1:1 ratio in permuted blocks. Data related to anaesthesia, surgery, oncology, and demographics were registered. The primary endpoint was five-year overall survival. Data are presented as Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Hazard Ratios based on Cox univariable regression analyses by both intention-to-treat and per-protocol. EudraCT, 2013-002380-25 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01975064.

Findings

Of 1764 patients, included from December 3, 2013, to September 29, 2017, 1670 remained for analysis. The numbers who survived at least five years were 773/841 (91.9% (95% CI 90.1-93.8)) in the propofol group and 764/829 (92.2% (90.3-94.0)) in the sevoflurane group, (HR 1.03 (0.73-1.44); P = 0.875); the corresponding results in the per-protocol-analysis were: 733/798 (91.9% (90.0-93.8)) and 653/710 (92.0% (90.0-94.0)) (HR = 1.01 (0.71-1.44); P = 0.955). Survival after a median follow-up of 76.7 months did not indicate any difference between the groups (HR 0.97, 0.72-1.29; P = 0.829, log rank test).

Interpretation

No difference in overall survival was found between general anaesthesia with propofol or sevoflurane for breast cancer surgery.

Funding

Swedish Research Council; Uppsala-Örebro Regional Research Council; Västmanland Regional Research Fund; Västmanland Cancer Foundation; Stig and Ragna Gohrton Foundation; Birgit and Henry Knutsson Foundation.

Rocuronium bromide suppresses esophageal cancer via blocking the secretion of C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 12 from cancer associated fibroblasts

BACKGROUND

Cancer associated fibroblasts (CAFs) communicate metabolically with tumor genesis and development. Rocuronium bromide (RB) is reported to exert certain inhibitory effect on tumor. Here, we investigate the role of RB in esophageal cancer (EC) malignant progression.

METHODS

Tumor xenograft models with EC cells were locally and systemically administrated with RB to detect the influence of different administrations on tumor progression. Mouse CAFs PDGFRα⁺/F4/80^- were sorted by Flow cytometry with specific antibodies. CAFs were treated with RB and co-cultured with EC cells. The proliferation, invasion and apoptosis assays of EC cells were performed to detect the influences of RB targeting CAFs on EC cell malignant progression. Human fibroblasts were employed to perform these detections to confirm RB indirect effect on EC cells. The gene expression changes of CAFs response to RB treatment were detected using RNA sequencing and verified by Western blot, immunohistochemistry and ELISA.

RESULTS

Tumors in xenograft mice were observed significantly inhibited by local RB administration, but not by systemic administration. Moreover EC cells did not show obvious change in viability when direct stimulated with RB in vitro. However, when CAFs treated with RB were co-cultured with EC cells, obvious suppressions were observed in EC cell malignancy, including proliferation, invasion and apoptosis. Human fibroblasts were employed to perform these assays and similar results were obtained. RNA sequencing data of human fibroblast treated with RB, and Western blot, immunohistochemistry and ELISA results all showed that CXCL12 expression was significantly diminished in vivo and in vitro by RB. EC cells direct treated with CXCL12 showed much higher malignancy. Moreover cell autophagy and PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway in CAFs were both suppressed by RB which can be reversed by Rapamycin pretreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that RB could repress PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway and autophagy to block the CXCL12 expression in CAFs, thereby weakening the CXCL12-mediated EC tumor progression. Our data provide a novel insight into the underlying mechanism of RB inhibiting EC, and emphasize the importance of tumor microenvironment (cytokines from CAFs) in modulating cancer malignant progression.

Association of Volatile Versus Intravenous Anesthesia With Prognosis After Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIM

A recent preclinical study reported that renal cell carcinoma was more susceptible to sevoflurane-mediated metastatic potentiation, compared to non-small cell lung cancer, suggesting that the effect of anesthetic agents on the metastatic potential varies according to cancer type. Based on this report, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare recurrence-free survival after nephrectomy, between renal cell carcinoma patients receiving volatile anesthesia and those receiving intravenous anesthesia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who underwent partial or radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma at the Seoul National University Hospital. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether volatile or intravenous anesthesia was used for nephrectomy. A total of 651 patients (582 in the volatile and 69 in the intravenous group) were enrolled in the study. Recurrence-free survival after nephrectomy was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Cox regression analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting revealed that volatile anesthesia had no impact on recurrence-free survival [hazard ratio (HR)=0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.07-2.85; p=0.398] or overall survival (HR=1.41; 95% CI=0.31-6.44; p=0.661).

CONCLUSION

We found no significant association between volatile anesthesia and poor outcomes after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. Volatile anesthetic-promoted metastatic potentiation of renal cell carcinoma, shown in a preclinical study, does not seem to be translated in the clinical setting.

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.

Total versus inhaled intravenous anesthesia methods for prognosis of patients with lung, breast, or esophageal cancer: A cohort study

Objective

To explore the influences of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and inhaled-intravenous anesthesia on the prognosis of patients with lung, breast, or esophageal cancer.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, patients with lung, breast, or esophageal cancer who underwent surgical treatments at Beijing Shijitan Hospital between January 2010 and December 2019 were included. The patients were categorized into the TIVA group and inhaled-intravenous anesthesia group, according to the anesthesia methods used for the patients for surgery of the primary cancer. The primary outcome of this study included overall survival (OS) and recurrence/metastasis.

Results

Totally, 336 patients were included in this study, 119 in the TIVA group and 217 in the inhaled-intravenous anesthesia group. The OS of patients in the TIVA group was higher than in the inhaled-intravenous anesthesia group (P = 0.042). There were no significant differences in the recurrence/metastasis-free survival between the two groups (P = 0.296). Inhaled-intravenous anesthesia (HR = 1.88, 95%CI: 1.15-3.07, P = 0.012), stage III cancer (HR = 5.88, 95%CI: 2.57-13.43, P < 0.001), and stage IV cancer (HR = 22.60, 95%CI: 8.97-56.95, P < 0.001) were independently associated with recurrence/ metastasis. Comorbidities (HR = 1.75, 95%CI: 1.05-2.92, P = 0.033), the use of ephedrine, noradrenaline or phenylephrine during surgery (HR = 2.12, 95%CI: 1.11-4.06, P = 0.024), stage II cancer (HR = 3.24, 95%CI: 1.08-9.68, P = 0.035), stage III cancer (HR = 7.60, 95%CI: 2.64-21.86, P < 0.001), and stage IV cancer (HR = 26.61, 95%CI: 8.57-82.64, P < 0.001) were independently associated with OS.

Conclusion

In patients with breast, lung, or esophageal cancer, TIVA is preferable than inhaled-intravenous anesthesia group for longer OS,, but TIVA was not associated with the recurrence/metastasis-free survival of patients.

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.

The Effect of Propofol versus Inhalation Anesthetics on Survival after Oncological Surgery

Every year, 19.3 million patients worldwide are diagnosed with cancer. Surgical resection represents a major therapeutical option and the vast majority of these patients receive anesthesia. However, despite surgical resection, almost one third of these patients develop local recurrence or distant metastases. Perioperative factors, such as surgical stress and anesthesia technique, have been suggested to play a role to a greater or lesser extent in the development of recurrences, but oncology encompasses a complicated tumor biology of which much is still unknown. The effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or volatile anesthesia (VA) on survival after oncological surgery has become a popular topic in recent years. Multiple studies conclude in favor of propofol. Despite the a priori probability that relevant differences in postoperative outcomes are due to the anesthesia technique employed, TIVA or VA, is extremely small. The existing literature includes mainly hypothesis-forming retrospective studies and small randomized trials with many methodological limitations. To date, it is unlikely that use of TIVA or VA affect cancer-free survival days to a clinically relevant extent. This review addresses all relevant studies in the field and provides a substantiated different view on this deeply controversial research topic.

Effect of Propofol or Etomidate as General Anaesthesia Induction on Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 10 Years' Follow-Up

Objective

The aim is to study the effect of intraoperative application of propofol and etomidate on the long-term prognosis of patients with gastric cancer at the same tumor stage.

Methods

A total of 1018 patients who underwent radical gastric cancer surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from January 2010 to December 2010 were selected and divided into the propofol and etomidate groups according to the different anesthetic induction drugs.

Results

Among 244 patients in TNM stage IIIA, survival times were 36.10 and 41.79 for etomidate and propofol, respectively, which were statistically different (p < 0.05). Among the 82 patients in TNM stage IIIC, survival times were 26.57 and 35.20 for etomidate and propofol, respectively, which were statistically different (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

In patients undergoing radical gastric cancer surgery, the application of propofol during induction of anaesthesia is more beneficial in improving the postoperative survival time compared to the application of etomidate at a specific TNM stage.

Systemic immune effects of anesthetics and their intracellular targets in tumors

According to the result released by the World Health Organization (WHO), non-communicable diseases have occupied four of the top 10 current causes for death in the world. Cancer is one of the significant factors that trigger complications and deaths; more than 80% cancer patients require surgical or palliative treatment. In this case, anesthetic treatment is indispensable. Since cancer is a heterogeneous disease, various types of interventions can activate oncogenes or mutate tumor suppressor genes. More and more researchers believe that anesthetics have a certain effect on the long-term recurrence and metastasis of tumors, but it is still controversial whether they promote or inhibit the progression of cancer. On this basis, a series of retrospective or prospective randomized clinical trials have been conducted, but it seems to be difficult to reach a conclusion within 5 years or longer. This article focuses on the effects of anesthetic drugs on immune function and cancer and reviews their latest targets on the tumor cells, in order to provide a theoretical basis for optimizing the selection of anesthetic drugs, exploring therapeutic targets, and improving the prognosis of cancer patients.

Anesthesia and cancer recurrence: an overview

Several perioperative factors are responsible for the dysregulation or suppression of the immune system with a possible impact on cancer cell growth and the development of new metastasis. These factors have the potential to directly suppress the immune system and activate hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and the sympathetic nervous system with a consequent further immunosuppressive effect.Anesthetics and analgesics used during the perioperative period may modulate the innate and adaptive immune system, inflammatory system, and angiogenesis, with a possible impact on cancer recurrence and long-term outcome. Even if the current data are controversial and contrasting, it is crucial to increase awareness about this topic among healthcare professionals for a future better and conscious choice of anesthetic techniques.In this article, we aimed to provide an overview regarding the relationship between anesthesia and cancer recurrence. We reviewed the effects of surgery, perioperative factors, and anesthetic agents on tumor cell survival and tumor recurrence.

Effect of Different General Anesthesia Methods on the Prognosis of Patients with Breast Cancer after Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

The effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalation anesthesia (IA) on the prognosis of breast cancer patients has been controversial. The study is aimed at exploring the effects of different anesthesia methods on the postoperative prognosis of breast cancer patients.

Methods

Literature retrieval was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CNKI databases. The literature topic was to compare the effects of TIVA and IA on the prognosis of patients undergoing breast cancer resection. Two researchers extracted data from the literature independently. This study included randomized controlled trials that evaluated for risk of bias according to the “Risk assessment Tool for Bias in Randomized Trials” in the Cochrane Manual. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the risk of bias in observational studies. The chi-square test was used for the heterogeneity test. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. If heterogeneity existed between literature, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were used to explore the source of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was performed by excluding low-quality and different-effect models. Data were statistically analyzed using the Cochrane software RevMan 5.3. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for statistical description.

Results

Seven literatures were selected for meta-analysis. There were 9781 patients, 3736 (38.20%) receiving TIVA and 6045 (61.80%) receiving inhalation anesthesia. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between TIVA and IA breast cancer patients (HR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.91, 1.22), Z = 0.70, P = 0.49). There was no difference in the literature (χ² = 6.82, P = 0.34, I² = 12%), and there was no obvious publication bias. There was no significant difference in recurrence-free survival (RFS) between TIVA and IA patients (HR = 0.95, 95% CI (0.79, 1.13), Z = 0.61, P = 0.54). There was no heterogeneity in the literature (χ² = 5.23, P = 0.52, I² = 0%), and there was no significant publication bias.

Conclusion

There is no significant difference in OS and RFS between TIVA and IA patients during breast cancer resection. The prognostic effects of TIVA and IA were similar.

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.

Early and Long-Term Outcomes after Propofol-and Sevoflurane-Based Anesthesia in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study

Background: Propofol is considered to protect against immunosuppression and has lower inflammatory responses in the perioperative period than volatile agents. We evaluated whether the anesthetic agent is associated with cancer outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 2616 patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery under general anesthesia between 2016 and 2018 (follow-up closure: July 2021) at a single institution. Patients received propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia or sevoflurane-based inhalational anesthesia. After propensity score matching, the postoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was compared as primary outcome, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Results: After 1:2 propensity matching, 717 patients were given propofol anesthesia and 1410 patients were given sevoflurane anesthesia. In the matched cohort, preoperative NLR was not significantly different between propofol and sevoflurane anesthesia (mean (95% CI)2.3 (1.8 to 2.8) and 2.2 (1.9 to 3.2); p = 0.72). NLR was significantly lower in propofol anesthesia at postoperative day two and five (mean difference (95% CI) 0.71 (0.43 to 0.98); p = 0.000 and 0.52 (0.30 to 0.74); p = 0.000). Urinary retention showed a higher incidence after propofol anesthesia (4.9% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.008). Other postoperative complications and overall/recurrence-free survival were not different in the two groups. Discussion: Although propofol anesthesia showed lower postoperative NLR than sevoflurane anesthesia, there was no association with clinical outcomes.

The Effects of Anesthetics on Glioma Progression: A Narrative Review

There are many established factors that influence glioma progression, including patient age, grade of tumor, genetic mutations, extent of surgical resection, and chemoradiotherapy. Although the exposure time to anesthetics during glioma resection surgery is relatively brief, the hemodynamic changes involved and medications used, as well as the stress response throughout the perioperative period, may also influence postoperative outcomes in glioma patients. There are numerous studies that have demonstrated that choice of anesthesia influences non-brain cancer outcomes; of particular interest are those describing that the use of total intravenous anesthesia may yield superior outcomes compared with volatile agents in in vitro and human studies. Much remains to be discovered on the topic of anesthesia's effect on glioma progression.

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.

Anesthesia and Oncology: Friend or Foe?

Cancer is a leading cause of death, and surgery is an important treatment modality. Laboratory research and retrospective studies have raised the suspicion that the choice of anesthetics for cancer surgery might affect the course of cancerous disease. The aim of this review is to provide a critical overview of the current state of knowledge. Inhalational anesthesia with volatiles or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol are the two most commonly used anesthetic techniques. Most data comparing volatile anesthetics with TIVA is from either in vitro or retrospective studies. Although conflicting, data shows a trend towards favoring propofol. Opioids are commonly used in anesthesia. Data on potential effects of opioids on growth and recurrence of cancer are scarce and conflicting. Preclinical studies have shown that opioids stimulate cancer growth through the µ-opioid receptor. Opioids also act as immunosuppressants and, therefore, have the potential to facilitate metastatic spread. However, the finding of an adverse effect of opioids on tumor growth and cancer recurrence by some retrospective studies has not been confirmed by prospective studies. Regional anesthesia has not been found to have a beneficial effect on the outcome of surgically treated cancer patients, but prospective studies are scarce. Local anesthetics might have a beneficial effect, as observed in animal and in vitro studies. However, prospective clinical studies strongly question such an effect. Blood products, which may be needed during extensive cancer surgery suppress the immune system, and data strongly suggest a negative impact on cancer recurrence. The potential effects of other commonly used anesthetic agents on the outcome of cancer patients have not been sufficiently studied for drawing valid conclusions. In conclusion, laboratory data and most retrospective studies suggest a potential advantage of TIVA over inhalational anesthesia on the outcome of surgical cancer patients, but prospective, randomized studies are missing. Given the state of weak scientific evidence, TIVA may be used as the preferred type of anesthesia unless there is an individual contraindication against it. Studies on the effects of other drugs frequently used in anesthesia are limited in number and quality, and have found conflicting results.

No Difference Among Inhaled Anesthetics on the Growth and Metastasis of Murine 4T1 Breast Cancers in a Mouse Model of Spontaneous Metastasis

Objective: This study evaluates the effect of the commonly used inhaled anesthetics isoflurane, sevoflurane, and desflurane on the viability and migration of murine 4T1 breast cancer cells, the growth, and lung metastasis in a syngenetic model of spontaneous metastasis.

Methods: The murine 4T1 breast cancer cells were exposed to isoflurane (2%), sevoflurane (3.6%), or desflurane (10.3%) for 3 h. Cell viability was measured using the MTT assay. The migratory capacity of 4T1 cells was assessed using a scratch assay after 24 h incubation. Female balb/c mice were subjected to orthotopic implantation of 4T1 cells under anesthesia with one of the inhaled anesthetics: 2% isoflurane, 3.6% sevoflurane, or 10.3% desflurane. Subsequently, resection of primary tumors was performed under the identical anesthetic used during implantation for 3 h. Three weeks later, the mice were euthanized to harvest lungs for ex vivo bioluminescent imaging and histological analysis. Blood was collected for serum cytokine assays by ELISA.

Results: There was no difference in cell viability among isoflurane, sevoflurane, desflurane, and control groups (n = 180 for each group, P = 0.648). Sevoflurane but not isoflurane or desflurane significantly increased the migration of 4T1 cells compared to the control group (n = 18, P = 0.024). There was no difference in the growth of the orthotopically implanted primary tumors (n = 12 for the isoflurane group, n = 11 for the sevoflurane group, and for the desflurane group, P = 0.879). Surgical dissection of primary tumors in mice under anesthesia with isoflurane, sevoflurane, or desflurane led to no difference in lung metastasis following surgery (P = 0.789). No significant difference was observed among isoflurane, sevoflurane, and desflurane groups in the serum levels of IL-6 (P = 0.284), CCL-1 (P = 0.591), MCP-1 (P = 0.135), and VEGF (P = 0.354).

Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that sevoflurane increased the migration of 4T1 breast cancer cells in vitro. Inhaled anesthetics isoflurane, sevoflurane, and desflurane had no difference on the growth of primary tumor and the lung metastasis of 4T1 cells in the mouse model of spontaneous metastasis with surgical removal of primary tumors.

Current Status and Prospects of Anesthesia and Breast Cancer: Does Anesthetic Technique Affect Recurrence and Survival Rates in Breast Cancer Surgery?

The relationship between the anesthetic technique and cancer recurrence has not yet been clarified in cancer surgery. Surgical stress and inhalation anesthesia suppress cell-mediated immunity (CMI), whereas intravenous (IV) anesthesia with propofol and regional anesthesia (RA) are known to be protective for CMI. Surgical stress, general anesthesia (GA) with inhalation anesthesia and opioids contribute to perioperative immunosuppression and may increase cancer recurrence and decrease survival. Surgical stress and GA activate the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and release neuroendocrine mediators such as cortisol, catecholamines, and prostaglandin E₂, which may reduce host defense immunity and promote distant metastasis. On the other hand, IV anesthesia with propofol and RA with paravertebral block or epidural anesthesia can weaken surgical stress and GA-induced immunosuppression and protect the host defense immunity. IV anesthesia with propofol and RA or in combination with GA may reduce cancer recurrence and improve patient survival compared to GA alone. We review the current status of the relationship between anesthesia and breast cancer recurrence using retrospective and prospective studies conducted with animal models and clinical samples, and discuss the future prospects for reducing breast cancer recurrence and improving survival rates in breast cancer surgery.

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.

Are there factors in the disease of peroneal necrotizing fasciitis which should be used when choosing the anesthetic technique?: Descriptive analysis of a cohort from two centers

BACKGROUND

This study aims to examine the factors affecting the selection of anaesthesia method in Fournier's gangrene.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation was made of 113 patients operated on because of Fournier's gangrene between January-May 2019. The operations were performed under spinal anaesthesia in 78 cases (Group S) and under general anaesthesia in 35 cases (Group G). The patients were evaluated regarding age, gender, the anaesthesia method used (spinal, general) anaesthetic agent applied, presence of sepsis, and biochemical, hematological and inflammatory parameters.

RESULTS

When the patients were evaluated regarding the Fournier Gangrene Severity Index (FGSI), patients in Group S had lower scores (p=0.001). Examination of the tomography images revealed that in 13 (37.1%) patients, air values were seen in the right or left gluteal area, or both, extending to the subcutaneous tissue. In the evaluation of the factors affecting the selection of general anaesthesia, a positive correlation was determined between an increase in FGSI (r=0.482, p=0.001) and the presence of sepsis (r=0.485, p=0.001) and gluteal region involvement (r=0.628, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The selection of anaesthesia method in Fournier gangrene patients is a complex process affected by factors, such as the patients' general condition, sepsis, and whether or not there is bleeding diathesis. The risk -benefit balance in the selection of anaesthesia method should be evaluated individually for patients.

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.

Sleeping Beauty: Anesthesia May Promote Relapse in Dogs With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in Complete Remission After Chemo-Immunotherapy

Surgery-induced stress and anesthesia-related immunosuppression are believed to play a critical role in human oncology patients. Studies have hypothesized that anesthesia influences patients' outcome, promoting tumor recurrence and metastasis. Aim of the study was to investigate whether anesthesia promoted relapse in dogs with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Medical records were searched for dogs with DLBCL, that were in complete remission (CR) after the same chemo-immunotherapy protocol. Dogs receiving anesthesia were included if the procedure was performed while in CR. Time to relapse (TTR) was obtained via Kaplan–Meier method. Association between anesthesia and relapse was assessed using a nested case-control design and estimated using conditional logistic regression. Sixty-one dogs with DLBCL were included. Overall median TTR was 329 days (95% CI, 281–377). Forty-eight (79%) dogs relapsed during the study period, while 13 (21%) were still in CR at data analysis closure. Eighteen (30%) dogs received anesthesia with opioids, propofol, and isoflurane or sevoflurane. The relative risk of lymphoma relapse for dogs undergoing anesthesia was significantly higher compared with dogs not undergoing anesthesia, with an odds ratio of 3.09 (P = 0.019) on multivariable analysis. Anesthesia may promote relapse in dogs with DLBCL treated with chemo-immunotherapy, although a role of perioperative stress cannot be ultimately excluded. Considering the high frequency of anesthetic procedures required for diagnostic and therapeutic protocols among oncology patients, it is of utmost interest to characterize the effects of single anesthetic agents on the immune system. Further prospective studies are needed to better define the impact of anesthesia on patients' outcome.

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.

Propofol decreases CD8+ T cells and sevoflurane increases regulatory T cells after lung cancer resection: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Anaesthetics generally have an immunosuppressive effect, which may be related to prognosis. We conducted to clarify the relationship between peri-operative immunosuppression and anaesthetic agents in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery, resulting in better selection of intraoperative anaesthesia.

Methods

Prospective randomized controlled study was performed in single-University hospital. Patients with lung cancer who were scheduled to undergo lung cancer resection between June 2018 and July 2019. Patients were randomly divided to three groups: desflurane (group D), sevoflurane (group S), and propofol (group P) groups. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were separated from the blood samples. CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, programmed death 1 (PD-1) on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and regulatory T cells were measured by flow cytometry. The Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was used to compare pre- and post-operative values for each anaesthesia.

Results

Eighty-two patients were enrolled; samples from 64 individuals (20 in group D, 22 in group S, and 22 in group P) were analysed after exclusion. The number of CD8+ T cells was significantly lower after the operation than before the operation in the group P (P<0.05). The proportion of regulatory T cells was significantly increased after surgery, compared with before surgery in the group S (P<0.05). There was no difference in PD-1 on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells after lung surgery among the three groups.

Conclusions

Propofol decreased the number of CD8+ T cells, while sevoflurane increased the proportion of regulatory T cells in patients after lung surgery; however, propofol, sevoflurane, and desflurane did not increase the proportion of PD-1 on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells after lung surgery. Sevoflurane and propofol may cause immunosuppression via different mechanisms after lung cancer surgery.

Trial Registration

UMIN-CTR: UMIN000031911.

The Role of General Anesthetic Drug Selection in Cancer Outcome

Cancer remains to be the leading cause of death globally. Surgery is a mainstay treatment for solid tumors. Thus, it is critical to optimize perioperative care. Anesthesia is a requisite component for surgical tumor resection, and general anesthesia is given in the vast majority of tumor resection cases. Because anesthetics are growingly recognized as immunomodulators, it is critical to optimize anesthetic regimens for cancer surgery if the selection can affect outcomes. Here, we reviewed the role of volatile and intravenous anesthesia used for cancer surgery in cancer recurrence.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of breast conserving surgery with propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia or volatile inhalational general anesthesia without propofol: a propensity score-matched, population-based cohort study

To estimate oncologic outcomes (overall survival [OS], locoregional recurrence [LRR], and distant metastasis [DM]) in patients with breast intraductal carcinoma (IDC) receiving breast conserving surgery (BCS) under propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or volatile inhalational (INHA) general anesthesia (GA) without propofol. Patients with breast IDC receiving BCS were recruited through propensity score matching and categorized by anesthesia techniques into propofol-based TIVA-GA and non-propofol-based INHA-GA groups, respectively. Cox regression analysis was performed to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR; 95% CI) of all-cause mortality for TIVA-GA with propofol compared with INHA-GA without propofol was 0.94 (0.83-1.31). The aHR (95% CI) of LRR for TIVA-GA with propofol group compared with INHA-GA without propofol was 0.77 (0.58-0.87). The aHR (95% CI) of DM for TIVA-GA with propofol compared with INHA-GA without propofol was 0.91 (0.82-1.24). Propofol-based TIVA-GA might be beneficial for reducing LRR in women with breast IDC receiving BCS compared with non-propofol-based INHA-GA.

Paravertebral block in regional anesthesia with propofol sedation reduces locoregional recurrence in patients with breast cancer receiving breast conservative surgery compared with volatile inhalational without propofol in general anesthesia

PURPOSE

We examined locoregional recurrence (LRR) in patients with breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) receiving breast conservative surgery (BCS) 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 BCS 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 0.67 (0.46-0.99) 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 2-3, and Her-2 positivity were 1.87 (1.03-3.42), 2.31 (1.20-4.44), 1.67 (1.09-2.56), 2.43 (1.18-4.97), 1.17 (1.03-1.19), 1.28 (1.13-2.24), 1.20 (1.05-2.22), and 1.59 (1.01-2.51), respectively, compared with those for differentiation grade I, clinical stage I, pT1, pN0, and HER-2 negativity. The aHR of LRR for adjuvant radiotherapy was 0.60 (0.38-0.97) compared with that for no adjuvant radiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

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

Effects of the Hypnotic Alkylphenol Derivative Propofol on Breast Cancer Progression. A Focus on Preclinical and Clinical Studies

Propofol is a hypnotic alkylphenol derivative with many biological activities. It is predominantly used in anesthesia and is the most used parenteral anesthetic agent in the United States. Accumulating preclinical studies have shown that this compound may inhibit cancer recurrence and metastasis. Nevertheless, other investigations provided evidence that this compound may promote breast cancer cell progression by modulating different molecular pathways. Clinical data on this topic are scarce and derive from retrospective analyses. For this reason, we reviewed and evaluated the available data to reveal insight into this controversial issue. More preclinical and clinical investigations are necessary to determine the potential role of propofol in the proliferation of breast cancer cells.

Propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia is associated with better survival than desflurane anesthesia in glioblastoma surgery

Background

Previous research has shown that anesthetic techniques can influence patient outcomes following cancer surgery. However, the effects of anesthesia in patients undergoing glioblastoma surgery are still not known. We studied the relationship between the type of anesthesia and patient outcomes following elective glioblastoma surgery.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent elective glioblastoma surgery between January 2008 and December 2018. Patients were grouped according to the anesthesia they received, desflurane or propofol. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted, and survival curves were presented from the date of surgery to death. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare hazard ratios for death after propensity matching.

Results

A total of 50 patients (45 deaths, 90.0%) under desflurane anesthesia and 53 patients (38 deaths, 72.0%) under propofol anesthesia were included. Thirty-eight patients remained in each group after propensity matching. Propofol anesthesia was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.30–0.85; P = 0.011) in a matched analysis. Furthermore, patients under propofol anesthesia exhibited less postoperative recurrence than those under desflurane anesthesia (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–0.98; P = 0.040) in a matched analysis.

Conclusions

In this limited sample size, we observed that propofol anesthesia was associated with improved survival and less postoperative recurrence in glioblastoma surgery than desflurane anesthesia. Further investigations are needed to examine the influence of propofol anesthesia on patient outcomes following glioblastoma surgery.

Agony of choice: How anesthetics affect the composition and function of extracellular vesicles

The choice of the anesthetic regime is suggested to affect clinical outcomes following major surgery. Propofol was shown to exert beneficial effects on different cancer outcomes, while volatile anesthetics may be favorable in cardiac surgery. Recently, extracellular vesicles (EVs) were discovered as essential signal mediators in physiological and pathophysiological processes including carcinogenesis and metastasis. Furthermore, depending on their cell source, EVs fulfill therapeutic functions. In addition to extracorporally produced EVs, appropriate systemic intervention such as remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is considered to promote endogenous release of therapeutically active EVs to mediate cardioprotective effects. EVs are assembled in cell-type specific manners and the composition of EVs is not only affected by the disease, but also by the applied anesthetic of anesthetized patients. Here, we compare known impacts of anesthetic agents on outcomes in cancer surgery and cardioprotection and link these effects to the composition and therapeutic potential of EVs.

Association Between Anesthesia Delivered During Tumor Resection and Cancer Survival: a Systematic Review of a Mixed Picture with Constant Themes

BACKGROUND

Surgery is required for cure of most solid tumors, and general anesthesia is required for most cancer surgery. The vast majority of cancer surgery is facilitated by general anesthesia using volatile inhalational agents such as isoflurane and sevoflurane. Only recently have the immunologic and oncologic effect of inhalational agents, and their alternative, propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), come under investigation.

METHODS

Between January 2019 and June 2020, English language articles on PubMed were searched for the keywords "Propofol" "TIVA" or "IV anesthesia" and either "cancer surgery" or "surgical oncology." Duplicates were removes, manuscripts classified as either in vitro, animal, translational, or clinical studies, and their results summarized within these categories.

RESULTS

In-vitro and translational data suggest that inhalational anesthetics are potent immunosuppressive and tumorigenic agents that promote metastasis, while propofol is anti-inflammatory, anti-tumorigenic, and prevents metastasis development. Clinically there is a recurring association, based largely on retrospective, single institution series, that TIVA is associated with significant improvements in disease-free interval and overall survival in a number of, but not all, solid tumors. The longer the surgery is, the more intense the surgical trauma is, the more aggressive the malignancy is, and the higher likelihood of an association is.

DISCUSSION

Prospective randomized trials, coupled with basic science and translational studies, are needed to further define this association.

Breast Cancer and Anaesthesia: Genetic Influence

Breast cancer is the leading cause of mortality in women. It is a heterogeneous disease with a high degree of inter-subject variability even in patients with the same type of tumor, with individualized medicine having acquired significant relevance in this field. The clinical and morphological heterogeneity of the different types of breast tumors has led to a diversity of staging and classification systems. Thus, these tumors show wide variability in genetic expression and prognostic biomarkers. Surgical treatment is essential in the management of these patients. However, the perioperative period has been found to significantly influence survival and cancer recurrence. There is growing interest in the pro-tumoral effect of different anaesthetic and analgesic agents used intraoperatively and their relationship with metastatic progression. There is cumulative evidence of the influence of anaesthetic techniques on the physiopathological mechanisms of survival and growth of the residual neoplastic cells released during surgery. Prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to obtain quality evidence on the relationship between cancer and anaesthesia. This document summarizes the evidence currently available about the effects of the anaesthetic agents and techniques used in primary cancer surgery and long-term oncologic outcomes, and the biomolecular mechanisms involved in their interaction.

Is It Definitely Clear That Long-Term Survival after Breast Cancer Surgery Is Not Affected by Anaesthetics?

Retrospective studies indicate that cancer survival may be affected by the anaesthetic technique. Propofol seems to be a better choice than volatile anaesthetics, such as sevoflurane. The first two retrospective studies suggested better long-term survival with propofol, but not for breast cancer. Subsequent retrospective studies from Asia indicated the same. When data from seven Swedish hospitals were analysed, including 6305 breast cancer patients, different analyses gave different results, from a non-significant difference in survival to a remarkably large difference in favour of propofol, an illustration of the innate weakness in the retrospective design. The largest randomised clinical trial, registered on clinicaltrial.gov, with survival as an outcome is the Cancer and Anesthesia study. Patients are here randomised to propofol or sevoflurane. The inclusion of patients with breast cancer was completed in autumn 2017. Delayed by the pandemic, one-year survival data for the cohort were presented in November 2020. Due to the extremely good short-term survival for breast cancer, one-year survival is of less interest for this disease. As the inclusions took almost five years, there was also a trend to observe. Unsurprisingly, no difference was found in one-year survival between the two groups, and the trend indicated no difference either.

The Intersection of Regional Anesthesia and Cancer Progression: A Theoretical Framework

The surgical stress and inflammatory response and volatile anesthetic agents have been shown to promote tumor metastasis in animal and in-vitro studies. Regional neuraxial anesthesia protects against these effects by decreasing the surgical stress and inflammatory response and associated changes in immune function in animals. However, evidence of a similar effect in humans remains equivocal due to the high variability and retrospective nature of clinical studies and difficulty in directly comparing regional versus general anesthesia in humans. We propose a theoretical framework to address the question of regional anesthesia as protective against metastasis.

This theoretical construct views the immune system, circulating tumor cells, micrometastases, and inflammatory mediators as distinct populations in a highly connected system. In ecological theory, highly connected populations demonstrate more resilience to local perturbations but are prone to system-wide shifts compared with their poorly connected counterparts. Neuraxial anesthesia transforms the otherwise system-wide perturbations of the surgical stress and inflammatory response and volatile anesthesia into a comparatively local perturbation to which the system is more resilient. We propose this framework for experimental and mathematical models to help determine the impact of anesthetic choice on recurrence and metastasis and create therapeutic strategies to improve cancer outcomes after surgery.