ArticleNeurosurgical review2021
The anesthetist's choice of inhalational vs. intravenous anesthetics has no impact on survival of glioblastoma patients.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Total Intravenous Versus Inhalational Anesthesia in High-Grade Glioma Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of type of anaesthesia on long-term outcomes in glioma patients undergoing craniotomy: A systematic review.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Review
- Total intravenous anaesthesia in neurosurgery: The fading role of inhalation agents?Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Glioblastoma Standard of Care: Effects on Tumor Evolution and Reverse Translation in Preclinical Models.Cancers · 2024Review
- Effects of anesthesia on long-term survival in cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Review
- The Effect of Propofol versus Inhalation Anesthetics on Survival after Oncological Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Sevoflurane Does Not Promote the Colony-Forming Ability of Human Mesenchymal Glioblastoma Stem Cells In Vitro.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Impact of dedicated neuro-anesthesia management on clinical outcomes in glioblastoma patients: A single-institution cohort study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Review
- An intravenous anesthetic drug-propofol, influences the biological characteristics of malignant tumors and reshapes the tumor microenvironment: A narrative literature review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Is It Definitely Clear That Long-Term Survival after Breast Cancer Surgery Is Not Affected by Anaesthetics?Cancers · 2021Review
- Propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia is associated with better survival than desflurane anesthesia in glioblastoma surgery.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent data suggest that the type of anesthesia used during the resection of solid tumors impacts the long-term survival of patients favoring total-intravenous-anesthesia (TIVA) over inhalative-anesthesia (INHA). Here we sought to query this impact on survival in patients undergoing resection of glioblastoma (GBM). All patients receiving elective resection of a newly diagnosed, isocitrate-dehydrogenase-1-(IDH1)-wildtype GBM under general anesthesia between January 2010 and June 2017 in the Department of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, were included. Patients were grouped according to the applied anesthetic technique. To adjust for potential prognostic confounders, patients were matched in a 1:2 ratio (TIVA vs. INHA), taking into account the known prognostic factors: age, extent of resection, O-6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase-(MGMT)-promoter-methylation-status, pre-operative Karnofsky-performance-index and adjuvant radio- and chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free-survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoint was overall-survival (OS). In the study period, 576 patients underwent resection of a newly diagnosed, IDH-wildtype GBM. Patients with incomplete follow-up-data, on palliative treatment, having emergency or awake surgery; 54 patients remained in the TIVA-group and 417 in the INHA-group. After matching, 52 patients remained in the TIVA-group and 92 in the INHA-group. Median PFS was 6 months in both groups. The median OS was 13.5 months in the TIVA-group and 13.0 months in the INHA-group. No significant survival differences associated with the type of anesthesia were found either before or after adjustment for known prognostic factors. This retrospective study supports the notion that the current anesthetic approaches employed during the resection of IDH-wildtype GBM do not impact patient survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.