Volatile Anesthetic Use Versus Total Intravenous Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Heart Valve Surgery: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have suggested that volatile anesthetic use may improve postoperative outcomes after cardiac surgery compared to total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) owing to its potential cardioprotective effect. However, the results were inconclusive, and few studies have included patients undergoing heart valve surgery. METHODS: This nationwide population-based study included all adult patients who underwent heart valve surgery between 2010 and 2019 in Korea based on data from a health insurance claim database. Patients were divided based on the use of volatile anesthetics: the volatile anesthetics or TIVA groups. After stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), the association between the use of volatile anesthetics and the risk of cumulative 1-year all-cause mortality (the primary outcome) and cumulative long-term (beyond 1 year) mortality were assessed using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 30,755 patients included in this study, the overall incidence of 1-year mortality was 8.5%. After stabilized IPTW, the risk of cumulative 1-year mortality did not differ in the volatile anesthetics group compared to the TIVA group (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.07; P = .602), nor did the risk of cumulative long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.04; P = .579) at a median (interquartile range) follow-up duration of 4.8 (2.6-7.6) years. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TIVA, volatile anesthetic use was not associated with reduced postoperative mortality risk in patients undergoing heart valve surgery. Our findings indicate that the use of volatile anesthetics does not have a significant impact on mortality after heart valve surgery. Therefore, the choice of anesthesia type can be based on the anesthesiologists' or institutional preference and experience.

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.

Distant survival for patients undergoing surgery using volatile versus IV anesthesia for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Whether anesthesia type is associated with the surgical outcome of Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) remains to be determined. This study aims to investigate the impact of volatile inhalational anesthesia (INHA) versus total IV anesthesia (TIVA) on the survival outcomes in HCC patients with PVTT. METHODS: A cohort of in-patients whom were diagnosed of HCC with PVTT in Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Shanghai, China, from January 1, 2008 to December 24, 2012 were identified. Surgical patients receiving the INHA and TIVA were screened out. The overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and several postoperative adverse events were compared according to anesthesia types. RESULTS: A total of 1513 patients were included in this study. After exclusions are applied, 263 patients remain in the INHA group and 208 in the TIVA group. Patients receiving INHA have a lower 5-year overall survival rate than that of patients receiving TIVA [12.6% (95% CI, 9.0 to 17.3) vs. 17.7% (95% CI, 11.3 to 20.8), P = 0.024]. Results of multivariable Cox-regression analysis also identify that INHA anesthesia is significantly associated with mortality and cancer recurrence after surgery compare to TIVA, with HR (95%CI) of 1.303 (1.065, 1.595) and 1.265 (1.040, 1.539), respectively. Subgroup analysis suggested that in more severe cancer patients, the worse outcome related to INHA might be more significant. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis identifies that TIVA is associated with better outcomes compared with INHA. Future prospective studies clinical and translational studies are required to verify this difference and investigate underlying pathophysiology.

Anesthesia in Combination with Propofol Increases Disease-Free Survival in Bladder Cancer Patients Who Undergo Radical Tumor Cystectomy as Compared to Inhalational Anesthetics and Opiate-Based Analgesia.

BACKGROUND: The effect of anesthetic techniques on cancer recurrence has been the subject of intensive research in the past years, as it affects a large proportion of the population. The use of opioids and halogenated agents in cancer patients during the perioperative period may be related to higher rates of cancer recurrence and reduced disease-free survival. METHODS: This was a prospective study. The sample was composed of 100 patients who underwent a radical cystectomy for infiltrating bladder cancer in a reference center. We compared disease-free survival associated with combined anesthesia versus opiate-based analgesia. The relationship between the administered hypnotic and disease-free survival was also investigated. RESULTS: The median disease-free survival of the patients who received combined anesthesia was 585 (240-1,005) days versus 210 (90-645) days in the other group. A significant difference was observed between the two groups (p = 0.01). Combined analysis of all groups revealed significant differences in disease-free survival between patients who received combined anesthesia with propofol (510 [315-1,545] disease-free days) and those who received sevoflurane and opioids (150 [90-450] disease-free days) (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesia may play a crucial role in tumor relapse, as it is administered at the moment of the greatest risk of dissemination: surgical handling of the tumor. Opioids and volatile agents have been related to an increased risk for cancer recurrence. We compared the use of propofol + local anesthesia versus sevoflurane + opioids and also found that disease-free survival was longer among patients who received propofol + local anesthesia. Disease-free survival increases with the use of propofol in combination with epidural anesthesia in patients who undergo surgery for infiltrating bladder cancer.

Propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia is associated with better survival than desflurane anesthesia in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery.

Previous researches have shown that anesthesia can affect the outcomes of many kinds of cancer after surgery. Here, we investigated the association between anesthesia and patient outcomes after elective open intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery.This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who received elective open intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery between January 2005 and December 2014. Patients were grouped according to the anesthesia received, that is, propofol or desflurane anesthesia. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed and survival curves were constructed from the date of surgery to death. After propensity matching, univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare hazard ratios for death. Subgroup analyses were performed for tumor node metastasis staging and postoperative metastasis and recurrence.A total of 34 patients (21 deaths, 62.0%) with propofol anesthesia and 36 (31 deaths, 86.0%) with desflurane anesthesia were eligible for analysis. After propensity matching, 58 patients remained in each group. In the matched analysis, the propofol anesthesia had a better survival with hazard ratio of 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.94, P = .032) compared with desflurane anesthesia. In addition, subgroup analyses showed that patients under propofol anesthesia had less postoperative metastases (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.88; P = .025), but not fewer postoperative recurrence formation (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval 0.46-2.93; P = .746), than those under desflurane anesthesia in the matched groups.In a limited sample size, propofol anesthesia was associated with better survival in open intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery. Prospective and large sample size researches are necessary to evaluate the effects of propofol anesthesia on the surgical outcomes of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery.

Regional Analgesia Added to General Anesthesia Compared With General Anesthesia Plus Systemic Analgesia for Cardiac Surgery in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to compare the effects of regional analgesic (RA) techniques with systemic analgesia on postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, resources utilization, reoperation, death, and complications of the analgesic techniques in children undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: A search was done in May 2018 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials comparing RA techniques with systemic analgesia. Risks of bias of included trials were judged with the Cochrane tool. Data were analyzed with fixed- (I(2) < 25%) or random-effects models (I(2) ≥ 25%). The quality of evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation working group scale. RESULTS: We included 14 randomized controlled trials with 605 participants (312 to RA and 293 to the comparator). RA reduces pain up to 24 hours after surgery. At 6-8 hours after surgery, the standardized mean difference was -0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.22 to -0.40; low-quality evidence). We did not find a difference for nausea and vomiting (risk ratio [RR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.61-1.31; very low-quality evidence), duration of tracheal intubation (standardized mean difference, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.40 to 0.05; low-quality evidence), intensive care unit length of stay (mean difference, -0.10 hours; 95% CI, -1.31 to 1.12 hours; low-quality evidence), hospital length of stay (mean difference, -0.02 days; 95% CI, -1.16 to 1.12 days; low-quality evidence), reoperation (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.17-3.28; low-quality evidence), death (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.05-4.94; low-quality evidence), and respiratory depression (RR, 2.06; 95% CI, 0.20-21.68; very low-quality evidence). No trial reported signs of local anesthetic toxicity or lasting neurological or infectious complications related to the RA techniques. One trial reported 1 transient ipsilateral episode of diaphragmatic paralysis with intrapleural analgesia that resolved with cessation of local anesthetic administration. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to systemic analgesia, RA techniques reduce postoperative pain up to 24 hours in children undergoing cardiac surgery. Currently, there is no evidence that RA for pediatric cardiac surgery has any impact on major morbidity and mortality. These results should be interpreted cautiously because they represent a meta-analysis of small and heterogeneous studies. Further studies are needed.

Etomidate is still a valid anesthetic for electroconvulsive therapy.

Komatsu et al have recently written that the use of etomidate as an anesthetic induction agent for surgery is associated with increased 30-day mortality and cardiovascular morbidity, compared with propofol. Etomidate has long been recognized as suppressing adrenocortical function and, as an infusion over days, has been indicted in increasing intensive care unit patient mortality. Even in single doses, etomidate causes a reduction in cortisol production, although recovery from single-dose suppression is generally prompt. In prospectively evaluating etomidate as an anesthetic for electroconvulsive therapy, Lebowitz et al, in a pilot study, found that 3 times per week, etomidate did not cause adrenocortical suppression that lasted until the following treatment. The steroid responses did not differ from those of methohexital, and no patient demonstrated evidence of cortisol deficiency. Consequently, concerns raised by Komatsu et al about etomidate's safety seem unwarranted when used for electroconvulsive therapy, and their study's conclusions likely relate to issues with their retrospective methodology.

Anesthetic induction with etomidate, rather than propofol, is associated with increased 30-day mortality and cardiovascular morbidity after noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Because etomidate impairs adrenal function and blunts the cortisol release associated with surgical stimulus, we hypothesized that patients induced with etomidate suffer greater mortality and morbidity than comparable patients induced with propofol. METHODS: We evaluated the electronic records of 31,148 ASA physical status III and IV patients who had noncardiac surgery at the Cleveland Clinic. Among these, anesthesia was induced with etomidate and maintained with volatile anesthetics in 2616 patients whereas 28,532 were given propofol for induction and maintained with volatile anesthetics. Two thousand one hundred forty-four patients given etomidate were propensity matched with 5233 patients given propofol and the groups compared on 30-day postoperative mortality, length of hospital stay, cardiovascular and infectious morbidities, vasopressor requirement, and intraoperative hemodynamics. RESULTS: Patients given etomidate had 2.5 (98% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-3.4) times the odds of dying than those given propofol. Etomidate patients also had significantly greater odds of having cardiovascular morbidity (odds ratio [OR] [98% CI]: 1.5 [1.2-2.0]), and significantly longer hospital stay (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.82 [0.78-0.87]). However, infectious morbidity (OR [98% CI]: 1.0 [0.8-1.2]) and intraoperative vasopressor use (OR [95% CI] 0.92: [0.82-1.0]) did not differ between the agents. CONCLUSION: Etomidate was associated with a substantially increased risk for 30-day mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and prolonged hospital stay. Our conclusions, especially on 30-day mortality, are robust to a strong unmeasured binary confounding variable. Although our study showed only an association between etomidate use and worse patients' outcomes but not causal relationship, clinicians should use etomidate judiciously, considering that improved hemodynamic stability at induction may be accompanied by substantially worse longer-term outcomes.

The effect of a bolus dose of etomidate on cortisol levels, mortality, and health services utilization: a systematic review.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the evidence on the effect of a bolus dose of etomidate on adrenal function, mortality, and health services utilization compared with other induction agents used for rapid sequence intubation. METHODS: We developed a systematic search strategy and applied it to 10 electronic bibliographic databases. We hand searched journals; reviewed conference proceedings, gray literature, and bibliographies of relevant literature; and contacted content experts for studies comparing a bolus dose of etomidate with other induction agents. Retrieved articles were reviewed and data were abstracted with standardized forms. Data were pooled with the random-effects model if at least 4 clinically homogenous studies of the same design reported the same outcome measure. All other data were reported qualitatively. RESULTS: From 3,083 titles reviewed, 20 met our inclusion criteria. Pooled mean cortisol levels were lower in elective surgical patients induced with etomidate compared with those induced with other agents between 1 and 4 hours postinduction. The differences varied from 6.1 microg/dL (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.4 to 9.9 microg/dL; P=.001) to 16.4 microg/dL (95% CI 9.7 to 23.1 microg/dL; P<.001). Two studies in critically ill patients reported significantly different cortisol levels up to 7 hours postinduction. None of the studies reviewed, nor our pooled estimate (odds ratio 1.14; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60), showed a statistically significant effect on mortality. Only one study reported longer ventilator, ICU, and hospital lengths of stay in patients intubated with etomidate. CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that etomidate suppresses adrenal function transiently without demonstrating a significant effect on mortality. However, no studies to date have been powered to detect a difference in hospital, ventilator, or ICU length of stay or in mortality.

[Safety of tumescent liposuction]. / Hohe Sicherheit der Tumeszenz-Liposuktion.

Liposuction surgery is increasing in frequency and is the most commonly performed cosmetic procedure to date. Regularly, complications and fatalities are reported by tabloids. The anaesthesiogical techniques used, however, are usually not reported. Tumescent liposuction has to be clearly separated from liposuction with intravenous sedation or under general anaesthesia. In tumescent liposuction, tumescent fluid containing saline, lidocaine and adrenaline is injected into the undesired fat deposits and the pain is controlled locally. In contrast, when liposuctions are performed either with intravenous sedation or under general anaesthesia, the patient is unconscious. In this study, the different anaesthesiological techniques currently used for liposuction were compared with each other. Reported fatalities were reviewed and it was determined, whether liposuction was performed as tumescent liposuction or if systemic sedation was used. To date, no fatalities were reported when tumescent liposuction was performed and a total of 396 457 liposuctions (including own unpublished data) was counted. Fatalities, however, were reported, when either intravenous sedation or general anaesthesia was performed, and a mortality rate of 2.6-19.1 per 100000 cases was counted. Liposuctions should therefore, whenever possible be performed as tumescent liposuction. Intravenous sedation or general anaesthesia should be more carefully considered.

A comparison of target-controlled infusion versus volatile inhalant anesthesia for heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time in a rat model.

We conducted this study to determine whether heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time differed significantly between rats receiving target-controlled infusion (TCI) and those under volatile inhalant anesthesia. TCI rats received intravenous propofol at an average effect site concentration of 11.3 microg/ml or propofol plus ketamine (5 mg/ml of propofol) at an average effect site concentration of 8.7 microg/ml. Inhalant anesthesia rats received isoflurane (average, 1.8%) delivered in medical-grade air. We used a tail-clamp response test to determine when a surgical plane of anesthesia was attained. Anesthesia was continued for 1 h from the first negative tail-clamp test. During this time the test was repeated every 10 min to confirm that a surgical plane of anesthesia was being maintained. Anesthesia then was discontinued, and the animals were monitored continuously until they recovered. Average heart rate was higher for rats during anesthesia with isoflurane compared with TCI propofol-ketamine (P =0.0053). Average respiratory rate was higher for TCI regimens compared with isoflurane anesthesia, with male rats having consistently faster respiratory rates than females (P <0.001). Recovery time was longer for both TCI regimens compared with isoflurane (P <0.001). Once venous access was accomplished, TCI anesthesia with propofol or propofol combined with a low dose of ketamine was comparable to an isoflurane inhalant regimen in ease of administration and control of the anesthetic event when used in rats for procedures of 1-h duration. Respiratory rate was increased and recovery time was longer for rats receiving the TCI regimens.

Intravenous infusion anesthesia with Propofol-Midazolam-fentanyl for experimental surgery in swine.

There is a need for prolonged anesthesia procedures in experimental surgery. Animals in this study received fentanyl, Midazolam, and Propofol administered by continuous intravenous infusion for anesthesia along with controlled ventilation. Time of anesthesia was 413 +/- 95 min. Animals could be extubated 20 +/- 12 min after operation. Animals recovered completely from anesthesia by day 1 after surgery with almost normal physical activity. This study clearly shows that intravenous infusion anesthesia is safe and easy to handle in prolonged anesthesia for experimental surgery in swine. This anesthetic protocol can also be used for intraoperative transportation.

Anestesia inhalatoria versus anestesia intravenosa

Aunque la anestesia total intravenosa puede ser una alternativa a la inhalatoria o balanceada, se precisan más estudios para delimitar cuales son realmente sus ventajas