Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31333811›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology2019

Long-term prognosis after cancer surgery with inhalational anesthesia and total intravenous anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhaosheng Jin, Ru Li, Jiaxin Liu, Jun Lin

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Anesthesia and cancer.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Anesthesia-related postoperative oncological surgical outcomes: a comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and volatile anesthesia. A meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Zhaosheng JinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Health Science Center Stony Brook, NY 11794-8480, USA.
Ru LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Health Science Center Stony Brook, NY 11794-8480, USA.
Jiaxin LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Health Science Center Stony Brook, NY 11794-8480, USA.
Jun LinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Health Science Center Stony Brook, NY 11794-8480, USA.
Stony Brook Medicine · USSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA number of teams have investigated the association between the mode of anesthesia and the long-term outcomes after cancer surgeries, with inconsistent conclusions. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the currently available findings of clinical studies on the long-term outcomes after cancer surgery under inhalational anesthesia with volatile anesthetics (VA) and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol.

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Central, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Web of Science citation index, US clinical trials register, UK clinical trials register, Australia and New Zealand Clinical trials register for clinical studies comparing postoperative outcomes of VA and TIVA. The included outcomes were all-cause mortality, recurrence and recurrence free survival. Meta-analysis was done using the generic inverse variance method.

resultsThe overall pooled hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was in favor of TIVA [Harzard ratio (HR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 0.89], so was the recurrence free survival (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.41). The subgroup analysis of mortality in different cancer types did not show any remarkable difference between the intravenous or volatile anesthesia. There was also no significant difference in recurrence.

conclusionOur meta-analysis suggests that TIVA is associated with lower all-cause mortality after cancer surgeries. As cancers of different origins can respond very differently to pharmacological intervention, more clinical trials are needed in each cancer types in order to substantiate the role of anesthesia in cancer surgery prognosis.

Indexed as

Cancerpatient outcomepropofolrecurrencesurvivalvolatile anesthetics

Identifiers

PMID31333811
PMCPMC6628011
OpenAlexW2987935716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.