The immunosuppressive effects of volatile versus intravenous anesthesia combined with epidural analgesia on kidney cancer: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the use of inhalational anesthesia leads to higher suppression of the cell-mediated immunity compared to total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing kidney cancer surgery under combined low thoracic epidural analgesia and general anesthesia. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to either propofol-based (intravenous anesthetic) or sevoflurane-based (volatile anesthetic) anesthesia group with 10 patients in each group, along with epidural analgesia in both groups. Amounts of natural killer (NK) cells, total T lymphocytes, and T lymphocyte subpopulations in the blood samples collected from the patients before surgery, at the end of the surgery and postoperative days 1, 3 and 7 were determined by flow cytometric analysis. The NK cell count served as the primary endpoint of the study, whereas the total T lymphocyte count and cell counts for T lymphocyte subpopulations were used as the secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Our study showed that there were no significant differences in the amount of NK cells, total T lymphocytes, regulatory T cells, and T-helper cells, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, and their subpopulations between the propofol- and sevoflurane-based anesthesia groups when the anesthesia was administered in combination with epidural analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot study did not support the hypothesis that the use of inhalational anesthesia leads to higher suppression of the cell-mediated immunity than that of total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing kidney cancer surgery under combined low thoracic epidural analgesia and general anesthesia.

Development and Validation of a New Cardio-Specific Resting Energy Expenditure Equation for Adults.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the accuracy of resting energy expenditure (REE) equations among patients who underwent cardiopulmonary bypass and developed/validated a more accurate cardio-specific equation (CSE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective observational cohort of 240 adults (derivation data set, 170 patients; validation data set, 70 patients). REEs were calculated with 6 equations-Penn State 2003a, Penn State 2003b, Ireton-Jones, Swinamer, Faisy, and American College of Chest Physicians-and results were compared with indirect calorimetry (IC). Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to develop the CSE. Agreement between measured and calculated REEs was assessed with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (LCCC), Bland-Altman plot, and regression analysis. RESULTS: LCCCs present poor agreement between measured and calculated REEs: 0.24 (95% CI, 0.19-0.29), for the Faisy equation; 0.15 (95% CI, 0.1-0.19), Ireton-Jones; 0.31 (95% CI, 0.25-0.37), Swinamer; 0.17 (95% CI, 0.13-0.21), Penn State 2003a; 0.19 (95% CI, 0.14-0.23), Penn State 2003b; and 0.11 (95% CI, 0.07-0.15), American College of Chest Physicians. Based on the derivation data set, REEs are explained by the following equation: CSE = 616 - 8 × age in years + 13 × weight in kilograms + 450 if on ventilator + 159 × MV in liters + 145 if on inotropes. Based on the validation study results, the LCCC between IC and the CSE was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73-0.88). CONCLUSION: The CSE has adequate precision and could be used for REE estimation for patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass if IC is unavailable.