Qiaoqin Yan, Haofeng Liang, Hengming Yin, Xianhua Ye
{"title":"与麻醉相关的肿瘤手术术后结果:全静脉麻醉与挥发性麻醉的比较。荟萃分析","authors":"Qiaoqin Yan, Haofeng Liang, Hengming Yin, Xianhua Ye","doi":"10.5114/wiitm.2023.133916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<b>Introduction</b><br/>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.<br/><br/><b>Aim</b><br/>This study compared TIVA versus VA for cancer surgery patients and investigated the potential correlation between anesthetics and their long-term surgical outcomes.<br/><br/><b>Material and methods</b><br/>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.<br/><br/><b>Results</b><br/>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).<br/><br/><b>Conclusions</b><br/>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.<br/><br/>","PeriodicalId":49361,"journal":{"name":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","volume":"100 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anesthesia-related postoperative oncological surgical outcomes: a comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and volatile anesthesia. A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Qiaoqin Yan, Haofeng Liang, Hengming Yin, Xianhua Ye\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/wiitm.2023.133916\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<b>Introduction</b><br/>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.<br/><br/><b>Aim</b><br/>This study compared TIVA versus VA for cancer surgery patients and investigated the potential correlation between anesthetics and their long-term surgical outcomes.<br/><br/><b>Material and methods</b><br/>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.<br/><br/><b>Results</b><br/>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).<br/><br/><b>Conclusions</b><br/>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.<br/><br/>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2023.133916\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2023.133916","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言在接受癌症手术的患者中,以丙泊酚为基础的全静脉麻醉(TIVA)是否比挥发性麻醉药(VA)能显著提高总生存率尚不明确。因此,评估 TIVA 和 VA 对长期肿瘤预后的影响至关重要。本研究比较了癌症手术患者使用 TIVA 和 VA 的情况,并调查了麻醉药与其长期手术预后之间的潜在相关性。计算了危险比(HR)和 95% CI 的统计测量值。我们使用 Cochrane Q 和 I2 统计量以及适当的 p 值评估了异质性。分析使用 RevMan 5.3。结果荟萃分析纳入了 10 项研究,共研究了 14036 名癌症患者,其中 6264 人接受了 TIVA 治疗,7777 人接受了 VA 治疗。在这项研究中,我们考察了接受 TIVA 和 VA 的癌症手术患者的长期肿瘤治疗效果。我们的数据显示,TIVA 组的总生存率(HR = 0.49,95% CI:0.30-0.80)和无复发生存率(HR = 0.56,95% CI:0.32-0.97)明显更高。本研究得出结论,与 VA 相比,TIVA 是一种更有效的麻醉剂,能为癌症患者术后获得更好的长期肿瘤治疗效果,因为与 VA 相比,TIVA 能为癌症患者提供更高的总生存率、无复发生存率以及更少的术后病理结果。
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.
期刊介绍:
Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques serves as a forum for exchange of multidisciplinary experiences in fields such as: surgery, gynaecology, urology, gastroenterology, neurosurgery, ENT surgery, cardiac surgery, anaesthesiology and radiology, as well as other branches of medicine dealing with miniinvasive techniques.