Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: BackgroundThis study was conducted retrospectively to investigate the survival of patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery with epidural combined with general anesthesia (EGA) and general anesthesia alone (GA).MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 596 patients with gastric cancer who were scheduled for radical resection. Propensity score matching was performed at a 1:1 ratio between GA (n=97) and EGA (n=97) to reduce selection bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors significantly correlated with recurrence and/or metastasis and prognosis. The 5-year overall survival rates of patients receiving EGA and GA alone were compared.ResultsAfter the propensity scores were matched, there were 97 patients who underwent EGA and 97 patients who underwent GA. For the entire population, reconstruction type, pN stage, and complications were significantly correlated with prognosis based on multivariate analyses. For patients with a recurrence and/or metastasis, lymphadenectomy and pN stage were shown to be independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis.ConclusionsIn summary, patients might benefit from EGA as a result of better analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, fewer postoperative complications, higher safety, and a lower rate of metastasis and recurrence is conducive to postoperative recovery in patients with gastric cancer.

SUBMITTER: Pei J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7210196 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsThe purpose of the present study was to compare the efficacies of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib versus TACE monotherapy for treating patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).MethodsWe enrolled 321 patients and selected 280 with advanced HCC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C) who underwent TACE therapy between February 2009 and February 2013. TACE alone (monotherapy group) was administered to 198 patients (70.7%), and the remaining 82 (29.3%) underwent repeat combined TACE and sorafenib therapy (combined group). To minimize selection bias, these latter 82 patients were matched using propensity-score matching at a 1∶2 ratio with 164 patients who received TACE monotherapy. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and related subgroup analysis. The secondary endpoints were time to progression (TTP) and treatment-related adverse events.ResultsOf the respective patients in the combined and monotherapy groups, 64.6% and 49.2% had vascular invasion, 87.8% and 91.1% had extrahepatic metastasis, and 54.3% and 47.1% had both. In the propensity-score-matched cohort, the OS survival of the combined group was significantly higher compared with the monotherapy group (7.0 months vs. 4.9 months, respectively, P = 0.003). The TTP was significantly longer in the combined group (2.6 months vs. 1.9 months, respectively, P = 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that the outcomes of patients with advanced HCC without main portal vein invasion who were treated with combined therapy were significantly better compared with those who received monotherapy (P<0.05). Univariate and subsequent multivariate analyses revealed that the addition of sorafenib was an independent predictor of favorable OS and TTP (adjusted hazard ratios, 0.63 and 0.62, respectively; P<0.05 for both).ConclusionSorafenib plus TACE was more effective than TACE monotherapy for treating patients with advanced HCC without main portal vein invasion. Future trials with larger samples are required to validate these preliminary findings.

Project description:BackgroundRecently, robot-assisted thoracic surgery has been increasingly performed for mediastinal disease. However, appropriate postoperative analgesic methods have not been evaluated.MethodsWe retrospectively studied patients who underwent robot-assisted thoracic surgery for mediastinal disease at a single university hospital between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were performed either general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia combined with thoracic epidural anesthesia, or general anesthesia combined with ultrasound-guided thoracic block. Patients were divided into three groups [non-block (NB), thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), and thoracic paraspinal block (TB)] according to postoperative analgesic methods, and they compared with terms of postoperative pain scores by using numerical rating scale (NRS) at 0, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 48 h. Additionally, rescue supplemental analgesic within 24 h, side effects of anesthesia such as respiratory depression, hypotension, postoperative nausea and vomiting, pruritus and urinary retention, time to ambulation after surgery, and hospital stay after surgery were also compared among the three groups.ResultsData from 169 patients (Group NB: 25, Group TEA: 102, and Group TB: 42) were progressed to the analysis. Postoperative pain scale at 6 and 12 h was significantly lower in Group TEA than NB (1.2±1.6 vs. 2.4±1.8, P<0.01; and 1.2±1.5 vs. 2.2±1.7, P=0.018, respectively). There were no differences in pain scores between Groups TB and TEA at any point. The incidence of patients using rescue analgesics within 24 h was significantly different between groups [Group NB: 15/25 (60%), Group TEA: 30/102 (29.4%), Group TB: 25/42 (59.5%), P=0.01]. For postoperative side effects, only the number of patients complaining of postoperative nausea and vomiting for 24 h after surgery differed significantly between groups [Group NB: 7/25 (28%), Group TEA: 19/102 (18.6%), Group TB: 1/42 (2.4%), P=0.01].ConclusionsTEA provided better analgesia after robot-assisted thoracic surgery for mediastinal disease than NB as indicated by lower pain scores and fewer rescue analgesic requirements. However, the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting was lowest in Group TB of all the groups. Thus, TBs might also provide adequate postoperative analgesia following robot-assisted thoracic surgery for mediastinal disease.

Project description:BackgroundThere is no consensus regarding the superiority of volatile or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in reducing the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after lung resection surgery (LRS). Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the different anesthetic regimens and the incidence of PPCs in patients who underwent LRS. We hypothesized that TIVA is associated with a lower incidence of PPCs than volatile anesthesia.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LRS at Taipei Veterans General Hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. The patients' charts were reviewed and data on patient characteristics, perioperative features, and postoperative outcomes were extracted and analyzed. The patients were categorized into TIVA or volatile anesthesia groups and their clinical data were compared. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce potential selection bias. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs, whereas the secondary outcomes were the incidences of other postoperative events, such as length of hospital stay (LOS) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).ResultsA total of 392 patients each were included in the TIVA and volatile anesthesia groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of PPCs between the volatile anesthesia and TIVA groups. The TIVA group had a shorter LOS (p < 0.001) and a lower incidence of PONV than the volatile anesthesia group (4.6% in the TIVA group vs. 8.2% in the volatile anesthesia group; p = 0.041). However, there were no significant differences in reintubation, 30-day readmission, and re-operation rates between the two groups.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between the incidence of PPCs in patients who underwent LRS under TIVA and that in patients who underwent LRS under volatile anesthesia. However, TIVA had shorter LOS and lower incidence of PONV which may be a better choice for maintenance of anesthesia in patients undergoing LRS.

Project description:ObjectiveAnimals underwent combined general-epidural anesthesia (EGA) is reported to have better long-time outcome than general anesthesia (GA). This study aimed to make overall evaluation of the association between these two anesthetic techniques and prognosis of cancer patients undergoing surgery.MethodsRelated databases such as PubMed and EMbase were searched for eligible studies that evaluated the influence of EGA and GA on the prognosis of cancer patients undergoing surgery. Selected studies were evaluated according to the inclusion criteria by two reviewers respectively, followed by data extraction and quality assessment. The odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the influence strength of EGA and GA on prognosis of cancer patients.ResultsA total of ten studies involving 3254 patients were included. The overall results demonstrated that there was no significant difference between EGA and GA group (OR?=?0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06, P?=?0.187) concerning postoperative recurrence and metastasis rate. In regard to the following two factors: cancer category and time of follow-up, subgroup analysis identified significant differences between EGA and GA in the group of patients with prostate cancer and the group with follow-up less than or equal to two years (OR?=?0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.95, P?=?0.027; OR?=?0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98, P?=?0.035; respectively) concerning postoperative recurrence and metastasis rate. However, no significant difference was found in the group of patients with colorectal cancer (OR?=?1.06, 95% CI 0.84-1.33, P?=?0.62).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that EGA might be associated with improvement in prognosis of patients with operable prostate cancer and the cancer patients with follow-up less than or equal to two years. However, no obvious relationship between the improvement in prognosis of colorectal cancer and EGA were detected, comparing to GA. Furthermore, all the results should be interpreted cautiously, as heterogeneous data were used for analyzing.

Dataset Information

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets