1
|
Blank M, Katsiampoura A, Wachtendorf LJ, Linhardt FC, Tartler TM, Raub D, Azimaraghi O, Chen G, Houle TT, Ferrone C, Eikermann M, Schaefer MS. Association Between Intraoperative Dexamethasone and Postoperative Mortality in Patients Undergoing Oncologic Surgery: A Multicentric Cohort Study. Ann Surg 2023; 278:e105-e114. [PMID: 35837889 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We examined the effects of dexamethasone on postoperative mortality, recurrence-free survival, and side effects in patients undergoing oncologic operations. BACKGROUND Dexamethasone prevents nausea and vomiting after anesthesia and may affect cancer proliferation. METHODS A total of 30,561 adult patients undergoing solid cancer resection between 2005 and 2020 were included. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to investigate the effect of dexamethasone on 1-year mortality and recurrence-free survival. Effect modification by the cancer's potential for immunogenicity, defined as a recommendation for checkpoint inhibitor therapy based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, was investigated through interaction term analysis. Key safety endpoints were dexamethasone-associated risk of hyperglycemia >180 mg/dL within 24 hours and surgical site infections within 30 days after surgery. RESULTS Dexamethasone was administered to 38.2% (11,666/30,561) of patients (6.5±2.3 mg). Overall, 3.2% (n=980/30,561) died and 15.4% (n=4718/30,561) experienced cancer recurrence within 1 year of the operation. Dexamethasone was associated with a -0.6% (95% confidence interval: -1.1, -0.2, P =0.007) 1-year mortality risk reduction [adjusted odds ratio (OR adj ): 0.79 (0.67, 0.94), P =0.009; hazard ratio=0.82 (0.69, 0.96), P =0.016] and higher odds of recurrence-free survival [OR adj : 1.28 (1.18, 1.39), P <0.001]. This effect was only present in patients with solid cancers who were defined as not to respond to checkpoint inhibitor therapy [OR adj : 0.70 (0.57, 0.87), P =0.001 vs OR adj : 1.13 (0.85, 1.50), P =0.40]. A high (>0.09 mg/kg) dose of dexamethasone increased the risk of postoperative hyperglycemia [OR adj : 1.55 (1.32, 1.82), P <0.001], but not for surgical site infections [OR adj : 0.84 (0.42, 1.71), P =0.63]. CONCLUSIONS Dexamethasone is associated with decreased 1-year mortality and cancer recurrence in patients undergoing surgical resection of cancers that are not candidates for immune modulators. Dexamethasone increased the risk of postoperative hyperglycemia, however, no increase in surgical site infections was identified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Blank
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York City, NY
| | - Anastasia Katsiampoura
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Luca J Wachtendorf
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York City, NY
| | - Felix C Linhardt
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York City, NY
| | - Tim M Tartler
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Dana Raub
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Omid Azimaraghi
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York City, NY
| | - Guanqing Chen
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Tim T Houle
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Cristina Ferrone
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Matthias Eikermann
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York City, NY
- Department of Anesthesiology, Essen University Hospital, Essen, Germany
| | - Maximilian S Schaefer
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Center for Anesthesia Research Excellence (CARE), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Düsseldorf University Hospital, Düsseldorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Murphy L, Shaker J, Buggy DJ. Anaesthetic Techniques and Strategies: Do They Influence Oncological Outcomes? Curr Oncol 2023; 30:5309-5321. [PMID: 37366886 PMCID: PMC10296968 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30060403] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2023] [Revised: 05/22/2023] [Accepted: 05/23/2023] [Indexed: 06/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the global disease burden of cancer increasing, and with at least 60% of cancer patients requiring surgery and, hence, anaesthesia over their disease course, the question of whether anaesthetic and analgesia techniques during primary cancer resection surgery might influence long term oncological outcomes assumes high priority. METHODS We searched the available literature linking anaesthetic-analgesic techniques and strategies during tumour resection surgery to oncological outcomes and synthesised this narrative review, predominantly using studies published since 2019. Current evidence is presented around opioids, regional anaesthesia, propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anaesthesia, dexamethasone, dexmedetomidine, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and beta-blockers. CONCLUSIONS The research base in onco-anaesthesia is expanding. There continue to be few sufficiently powered RCTs, which are necessary to confirm a causal link between any perioperative intervention and long-term oncologic outcome. In the absence of any convincing Level 1 recommending a change in practice, long-term oncologic benefit should not be part of the decision on choice of anaesthetic technique for tumour resection surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liam Murphy
- Department of Anaesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Mater University Hospital, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, D07 R2WY Dublin, Ireland; (J.S.); (D.J.B.)
| | - John Shaker
- Department of Anaesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Mater University Hospital, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, D07 R2WY Dublin, Ireland; (J.S.); (D.J.B.)
| | - Donal J. Buggy
- Department of Anaesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Mater University Hospital, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, D07 R2WY Dublin, Ireland; (J.S.); (D.J.B.)
- European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Onco-Anaesthesiology Research Group, 24 Rue des Comédiens, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
- Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kienbaum P, Schaefer MS, Weibel S, Schlesinger T, Meybohm P, Eberhart LH, Kranke P. [Update on PONV-What is new in prophylaxis and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting? : Summary of recent consensus recommendations and Cochrane reviews on prophylaxis and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting]. Anaesthesist 2021; 71:123-128. [PMID: 34596699 DOI: 10.1007/s00101-021-01045-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
The prophylaxis and treatment of postoperative pain to enhance patient comfort has been a primary goal of anesthesiologists for the last decades; however, avoiding postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is, from a patient's perspective, a highly relevant and equally important goal of anesthesia. Recent consensus-based guidelines suggest the assessment of risk factors including female gender, postoperative opioid administration, non-smoking status, a history of PONV or motion sickness, young patient age, longer duration of anesthesia, volatile anesthetics and the type of surgery and reducing the patient's baseline risk (e.g. through the use of regional anesthesia and administration of non-opioid analgesics as part of a multimodal approach). In general, a liberal PONV prophylaxis is encouraged for adult patients and children, which should also be administered when no risk assessment is made. The basis for every adult patient should be a standard prophylaxis with two antiemetics, such as dexamethasone in combination with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. In patients at high risk, this should be supplemented by a third and potentially a fourth antiemetic prophylaxis with a different mechanism of action. A recently published comprehensive Cochrane meta-analysis comparing available antiemetic prophylaxes reported the highest effectiveness to prevent PONV for the NK1 receptor antagonist aprepitant (relative risk, RR 0.26), followed by ramosetron (RR 0.44), granisetron (RR 0.45), dexamethasone (RR 0.51) and ondansetron (RR 0.55), thereby revising the dogma that every antiemetic is equally effective. Adverse events of antiemetics were generally rare and reported in less than half of the included studies, yielding a low quality of evidence for these end points. In general, combinations of different antiemetics were more effective than single prophylaxes. In children above 3 years of age, the same principles should be applied as in adults. For these patients, there is a high degree of evidence for the combination of dexamethasone and 5‑HT3 receptor antagonists. When PONV occurs, the consensus guidelines suggest that antiemetics from a class different than given as prophylaxis should be administered. To decrease the incidence of PONV and increase the quality of care, the importance of the implementation of institutional-level guidelines and protocols as well as assessment of PONV prophylaxis and PONV incidence is highly recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Kienbaum
- Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland
| | - Maximilian S Schaefer
- Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland. .,Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, 02215, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Stephanie Weibel
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
| | - Tobias Schlesinger
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
| | - Patrick Meybohm
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
| | - Leopold H Eberhart
- Klinik für Anästhesie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Marburg, Marburg, Deutschland
| | - Peter Kranke
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|