ArticleCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
Effect of Local Versus General Anesthesia in Breast-Conserving Surgery on Cancer Recurrence and Cost.
Article in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Breast-Conserving Surgery Performed Under Local and General Anesthesia.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe association between the type of anesthesia used and the recurrence of cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the effects of local vs general anesthesia on recurrence-free survival and cost after breast-conserving surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe reviewed the data of 2778 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery followed by radiation at our center between 1999 and 2014. We analyzed the data of 994 patients with hormone receptor-positive and Her2-negative tumors who underwent breast-conserving surgery without axillary lymph node dissection under local or general anesthesia. Patients were grouped according to whether local or general anesthesia was used for the surgery.
resultsOf the 994 patients enrolled in this study, 367 received local anesthesia and 627 patients received general anesthesia. The median follow-up duration for all patients was 93 months. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves did not reveal significant differences between the recurrence-free survival of the two groups, with 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of 96.3% (95% CI, 94.3-98.3%) in the local anesthesia group and 97.3% (95% CI, 95.9-98.7%) in the general anesthesia group. The total cost of hospitalization in the local anesthesia group was significantly lower than that in the general anesthesia group (
conclusionsOur analysis indicated no association between the type of anesthesia used during breast-conserving surgery and the long-term prognosis of breast cancer. However
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.