Effects of intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on postoperative inflammatory markers in patients with esophageal cancer: a retrospective study.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Jie Ren, Yue Ma, Ming Wei, Zhiguo Li
{"title":"Effects of intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on postoperative inflammatory markers in patients with esophageal cancer: a retrospective study.","authors":"Jie Ren, Yue Ma, Ming Wei, Zhiguo Li","doi":"10.1186/s12871-024-02856-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inflammatory markers have been confirmed to be associated with the prognosis of cancer patients. In this study, we compared the impacts of intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) after esophageal cancer surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who underwent esophagectomy from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. Patients respectively received total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or inhalational anesthesia (INHA). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was employed to minimize differences. The Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal Wallis test was utilized to compare the effect of the two groups on postoperative NLR, PLR and SII.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 519 patients who had undergone esophageal cancer resection were recruited in this study, among whom 339 patients were eligible (TIVA group, n = 201, INHA group, n = 138). After IPTW, there was no statistically significant difference in NLR, PLR, and SII on the first postoperative day(P = 0.1951), (P = 0.5611), (P = 0.9684) and on the third postoperative day(P = 0.5961), (P = 0.1804), (P = 0.9653) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In conclusion, there was no significant difference in NLR, PLR and SII between intravenous anesthesia or inhalational anesthesia. TIVA is not superior to INHA in reducing the perioperative inflammatory response of esophageal cancer.</p><p><strong>Synopsis: </strong>Inflammatory markers play an important role in the recurrence, metastasis and survival of tumor patients after surgery. In this study, we will compare the effects of different anesthesia methods on inflammatory markers.</p>","PeriodicalId":9190,"journal":{"name":"BMC Anesthesiology","volume":"24 1","pages":"462"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11657223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-024-02856-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Inflammatory markers have been confirmed to be associated with the prognosis of cancer patients. In this study, we compared the impacts of intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) after esophageal cancer surgery.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who underwent esophagectomy from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. Patients respectively received total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or inhalational anesthesia (INHA). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was employed to minimize differences. The Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal Wallis test was utilized to compare the effect of the two groups on postoperative NLR, PLR and SII.

Results: A total of 519 patients who had undergone esophageal cancer resection were recruited in this study, among whom 339 patients were eligible (TIVA group, n = 201, INHA group, n = 138). After IPTW, there was no statistically significant difference in NLR, PLR, and SII on the first postoperative day(P = 0.1951), (P = 0.5611), (P = 0.9684) and on the third postoperative day(P = 0.5961), (P = 0.1804), (P = 0.9653) between the two groups.

Conclusions: In conclusion, there was no significant difference in NLR, PLR and SII between intravenous anesthesia or inhalational anesthesia. TIVA is not superior to INHA in reducing the perioperative inflammatory response of esophageal cancer.

Synopsis: Inflammatory markers play an important role in the recurrence, metastasis and survival of tumor patients after surgery. In this study, we will compare the effects of different anesthesia methods on inflammatory markers.

静脉麻醉和吸入麻醉对食管癌患者术后炎症指标影响的回顾性研究。
背景:炎症标志物已被证实与癌症患者的预后有关。本研究比较了静脉麻醉和吸入麻醉对食管癌术后中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值(NLR)、血小板与淋巴细胞比值(PLR)和全身免疫炎症指数(SII)的影响。方法:回顾性分析2014年1月1日至2016年12月31日食管癌切除术患者的电子病历。患者分别接受全静脉麻醉(TIVA)和吸入麻醉(INHA)。采用处理加权逆概率(IPTW)最小化差异。采用Mann-Whitney U检验或Kruskal Wallis检验比较两组术后NLR、PLR和SII的影响。结果:本研究共纳入519例食管癌切除术患者,其中符合条件的患者339例(TIVA组,n = 201, INHA组,n = 138)。IPTW术后,两组患者术后第1天(P = 0.1951)、(P = 0.5611)、(P = 0.9684)及术后第3天(P = 0.5961)、(P = 0.1804)、(P = 0.9653) NLR、PLR、SII比较,差异均无统计学意义。结论:静脉麻醉与吸入麻醉在NLR、PLR和SII方面无显著差异。在降低食管癌围手术期炎症反应方面,TIVA并不优于INHA。摘要:炎症标志物在肿瘤患者术后复发、转移及生存中起着重要作用。在本研究中,我们将比较不同麻醉方法对炎症标志物的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Anesthesiology
BMC Anesthesiology ANESTHESIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
349
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Anesthesiology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of anesthesiology, critical care, perioperative care and pain management, including clinical and experimental research into anesthetic mechanisms, administration and efficacy, technology and monitoring, and associated economic issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信