{"title":"挥发性或静脉麻醉食管切除术后的呼吸系统并发症。","authors":"Yuki Hirano, Takaaki Konishi, Hidehiro Kaneko, Shotaro Aso, Satoru Matsuda, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Yuya Kimura, Hiroki Matsui, Kiyohide Fushimi, Hiroyuki Daiko, Osamu Itano, Hideo Yasunaga, Yuko Kitagawa","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znaf052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The anaesthesia regimen may affect the risk of postoperative respiratory complications. However, the optimal anaesthetic choice for oesophagectomy remains unclear. This retrospective study compared the effect of desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol anaesthesia on short-term outcomes after oesophagectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data of patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer during April 2012-March 2022 were extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. Propensity score matching weight analysis was conducted to compare respiratory complications, ventilatory failure, and in-hospital mortality between desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol anaesthesia, adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression and instrumental variable analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 21 080 included patients (desflurane group 7823, sevoflurane group 8932, and propofol group 4325 patients), respiratory complications and ventilatory failure occurred in 3399 (16.1%) and 960 (4.6%) patients respectively. Upon matching weight analysis, sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia were significantly associated with higher incidences of respiratory complications (OR 1.13, 95% c.i. 1.03 to 1.24 and OR 1.43, 95% c.i. 1.28 to 1.58 respectively) and ventilatory failure (OR 1.21, 95% c.i. 1.02 to 1.43 and OR 1.29, 95% c.i. 1.06 to 1.56 respectively) compared with desflurane anaesthesia. In-hospital mortality after desflurane anaesthesia was the lowest of the three anaesthesia (1.6% and 1.8% versus 1.2%; OR 1.30, 95% c.i. 0.98 to 1.73 and OR 1.49, 95% c.i. 1.08 to 2.06 respectively). Multivariable logistic regression and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated similar results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia for oesophagectomy were associated with worse respiratory outcomes compared with desflurane anaesthesia.</p>","PeriodicalId":136,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Surgery","volume":"112 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Respiratory complications after oesophagectomy using volatile or intravenous anaesthesia.\",\"authors\":\"Yuki Hirano, Takaaki Konishi, Hidehiro Kaneko, Shotaro Aso, Satoru Matsuda, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Yuya Kimura, Hiroki Matsui, Kiyohide Fushimi, Hiroyuki Daiko, Osamu Itano, Hideo Yasunaga, Yuko Kitagawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjs/znaf052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The anaesthesia regimen may affect the risk of postoperative respiratory complications. However, the optimal anaesthetic choice for oesophagectomy remains unclear. This retrospective study compared the effect of desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol anaesthesia on short-term outcomes after oesophagectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data of patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer during April 2012-March 2022 were extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. Propensity score matching weight analysis was conducted to compare respiratory complications, ventilatory failure, and in-hospital mortality between desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol anaesthesia, adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression and instrumental variable analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 21 080 included patients (desflurane group 7823, sevoflurane group 8932, and propofol group 4325 patients), respiratory complications and ventilatory failure occurred in 3399 (16.1%) and 960 (4.6%) patients respectively. Upon matching weight analysis, sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia were significantly associated with higher incidences of respiratory complications (OR 1.13, 95% c.i. 1.03 to 1.24 and OR 1.43, 95% c.i. 1.28 to 1.58 respectively) and ventilatory failure (OR 1.21, 95% c.i. 1.02 to 1.43 and OR 1.29, 95% c.i. 1.06 to 1.56 respectively) compared with desflurane anaesthesia. In-hospital mortality after desflurane anaesthesia was the lowest of the three anaesthesia (1.6% and 1.8% versus 1.2%; OR 1.30, 95% c.i. 0.98 to 1.73 and OR 1.49, 95% c.i. 1.08 to 2.06 respectively). Multivariable logistic regression and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated similar results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia for oesophagectomy were associated with worse respiratory outcomes compared with desflurane anaesthesia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"112 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf052\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf052","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:麻醉方案可能影响术后呼吸系统并发症的发生。然而,食道切除术的最佳麻醉选择仍不清楚。本回顾性研究比较了地氟醚、七氟醚和异丙酚麻醉对食管切除术后短期预后的影响。方法:从日本全国住院患者数据库中提取2012年4月至2022年3月期间因癌症接受食管癌切除术的患者数据。进行倾向评分匹配权重分析,比较地氟醚、七氟醚和异丙酚麻醉之间的呼吸并发症、呼吸衰竭和住院死亡率,并对潜在混杂因素进行调整。使用多变量逻辑回归和工具变量分析进行敏感性分析。结果:21 080例患者(地氟醚组7823例,七氟醚组8932例,异丙酚组4325例)中,发生呼吸并发症3399例(16.1%),发生呼吸衰竭960例(4.6%)。匹配权重分析显示,与地氟醚麻醉相比,七氟醚和异丙酚麻醉与呼吸系统并发症(OR分别为1.13、95% ci 1.03 ~ 1.24和1.43、95% ci 1.28 ~ 1.58)和呼吸衰竭(OR分别为1.21、95% ci 1.02 ~ 1.43和1.29、95% ci 1.06 ~ 1.56)的发生率显著相关。地氟醚麻醉后的住院死亡率是三种麻醉中最低的(1.6%和1.8%);OR分别为1.30,95% c.i. 0.98 - 1.73和1.49,95% c.i. 1.08 - 2.06)。多变量逻辑回归和工具变量分析显示了类似的结果。结论:与地氟醚麻醉相比,七氟醚和异丙酚麻醉用于食管切除术的呼吸结果更差。
Respiratory complications after oesophagectomy using volatile or intravenous anaesthesia.
Background: The anaesthesia regimen may affect the risk of postoperative respiratory complications. However, the optimal anaesthetic choice for oesophagectomy remains unclear. This retrospective study compared the effect of desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol anaesthesia on short-term outcomes after oesophagectomy.
Methods: Data of patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer during April 2012-March 2022 were extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. Propensity score matching weight analysis was conducted to compare respiratory complications, ventilatory failure, and in-hospital mortality between desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol anaesthesia, adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression and instrumental variable analyses.
Results: Among 21 080 included patients (desflurane group 7823, sevoflurane group 8932, and propofol group 4325 patients), respiratory complications and ventilatory failure occurred in 3399 (16.1%) and 960 (4.6%) patients respectively. Upon matching weight analysis, sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia were significantly associated with higher incidences of respiratory complications (OR 1.13, 95% c.i. 1.03 to 1.24 and OR 1.43, 95% c.i. 1.28 to 1.58 respectively) and ventilatory failure (OR 1.21, 95% c.i. 1.02 to 1.43 and OR 1.29, 95% c.i. 1.06 to 1.56 respectively) compared with desflurane anaesthesia. In-hospital mortality after desflurane anaesthesia was the lowest of the three anaesthesia (1.6% and 1.8% versus 1.2%; OR 1.30, 95% c.i. 0.98 to 1.73 and OR 1.49, 95% c.i. 1.08 to 2.06 respectively). Multivariable logistic regression and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated similar results.
Conclusions: Sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia for oesophagectomy were associated with worse respiratory outcomes compared with desflurane anaesthesia.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Surgery (BJS), incorporating the European Journal of Surgery, stands as Europe's leading peer-reviewed surgical journal. It serves as an invaluable platform for presenting high-quality clinical and laboratory-based research across a wide range of surgical topics. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of traditional surgical practices, BJS also showcases emerging areas in the field, such as minimally invasive therapy and interventional radiology.
While the journal appeals to general surgeons, it also holds relevance for specialty surgeons and professionals working in closely related fields. By presenting cutting-edge research and advancements, BJS aims to revolutionize the way surgical knowledge is shared and contribute to the ongoing progress of the surgical community.