Effect of inhalational agents in breast cancer surgery on tumour metastasis: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-14 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_876_24
Satheesh Gunashekar, Alisha Chachra, Soumya Subhra Datta, Ajit Kumar, Arun Jagath, Dhatri Jonna
{"title":"Effect of inhalational agents in breast cancer surgery on tumour metastasis: Systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Satheesh Gunashekar, Alisha Chachra, Soumya Subhra Datta, Ajit Kumar, Arun Jagath, Dhatri Jonna","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_876_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>The primary treatment for breast cancer involves surgically removing the affected breast. Different types of anaesthesia used during surgery may have an impact on cancer recurrence. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the current level of evidence for the impact of the type of anaesthesia for breast cancer surgery on cancer recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PROSPERO registration, a comprehensive database search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar, encompassing all available data up to December 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies assessing the effect of inhalational anaesthetic agents on cancer recurrence after breast cancer surgeries were included. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used for risk of bias assessment in RCTs and retrospective studies, respectively. We inverted the hazard ratio (HR) to (1/HR) for studies that reported inhalational as the control group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies were included: four RCTs and four retrospective cohort studies. No association between the anaesthetic agent used and the recurrence of breast cancer was seen in RCTs (risk ratio (RR) =1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89, 1.29). Included retrospective cohort studies showed RR = 1.46 (95% CI: 1.32, 1.62), showing an association of recurrence with inhalational agents compared to total intravenous anaesthesia-based or regional anaesthesia with significant bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The retrospective studies suggest a possible association between inhalational anaesthesia and breast cancer recurrence. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the inherent limitations of retrospective studies, including a higher risk of bias and variability in control group definitions. This contradicts findings from prospective RCTs. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind this association and to weigh the pros and cons of different anaesthesia techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"69 6","pages":"561-569"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12133039/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_876_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: The primary treatment for breast cancer involves surgically removing the affected breast. Different types of anaesthesia used during surgery may have an impact on cancer recurrence. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the current level of evidence for the impact of the type of anaesthesia for breast cancer surgery on cancer recurrence.

Methods: Following PROSPERO registration, a comprehensive database search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar, encompassing all available data up to December 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies assessing the effect of inhalational anaesthetic agents on cancer recurrence after breast cancer surgeries were included. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used for risk of bias assessment in RCTs and retrospective studies, respectively. We inverted the hazard ratio (HR) to (1/HR) for studies that reported inhalational as the control group.

Results: Eight studies were included: four RCTs and four retrospective cohort studies. No association between the anaesthetic agent used and the recurrence of breast cancer was seen in RCTs (risk ratio (RR) =1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89, 1.29). Included retrospective cohort studies showed RR = 1.46 (95% CI: 1.32, 1.62), showing an association of recurrence with inhalational agents compared to total intravenous anaesthesia-based or regional anaesthesia with significant bias.

Conclusion: The retrospective studies suggest a possible association between inhalational anaesthesia and breast cancer recurrence. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the inherent limitations of retrospective studies, including a higher risk of bias and variability in control group definitions. This contradicts findings from prospective RCTs. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind this association and to weigh the pros and cons of different anaesthesia techniques.

乳腺癌手术中吸入性药物对肿瘤转移的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:乳腺癌的主要治疗包括手术切除受影响的乳房。手术中使用的不同类型的麻醉可能对癌症复发有影响。本荟萃分析旨在评估乳腺癌手术麻醉类型对癌症复发影响的现有证据水平。方法:在PROSPERO注册后,对PubMed、Cochrane、Embase、Scopus和谷歌Scholar进行了全面的数据库检索,包括截至2024年12月的所有可用数据。随机对照试验(RCTs)和回顾性研究评估吸入麻醉剂对乳腺癌手术后癌症复发的影响。在随机对照试验和回顾性研究中,分别使用Cochrane Collaboration的偏倚风险和Newcastle-Ottawa量表进行偏倚风险评估。我们将报告吸入性作为对照组的研究的风险比(HR)倒置为(1/HR)。结果:纳入8项研究:4项随机对照试验和4项回顾性队列研究。在随机对照试验中,麻醉药物的使用与乳腺癌的复发没有关联(风险比(RR) =1.07, 95%可信区间(CI): 0.89, 1.29)。纳入的回顾性队列研究显示,RR = 1.46 (95% CI: 1.32, 1.62),与全静脉麻醉或局部麻醉相比,吸入性药物与复发相关,存在显著偏倚。结论:回顾性研究提示吸入麻醉与乳腺癌复发之间可能存在关联。然而,由于回顾性研究固有的局限性,包括较高的偏倚风险和对照组定义的可变性,这些发现应谨慎解释。这与前瞻性随机对照试验的结果相矛盾。需要进一步的研究来了解这种关联背后的机制,并权衡不同麻醉技术的利弊。
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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信