Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2023
Outcomes of intravenous and inhalation anesthesia on patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery: a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Survival outcomes following total intravenous versus volatile anesthesia in esophagogastric cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Impact of propofol on gastrointestinal cancer outcomes: A review of cellular behavior, growth, and metastasis.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Effects of intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on postoperative inflammatory markers in patients with esophageal cancer: a retrospective study.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
- Effects of anesthesia on long-term survival in cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Heliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDifferent anesthetics may have opposite effects on the immune system, thus affecting the prognosis of tumor patients. Cell-mediated immunity forms the primary defense against the invasion of tumor cells, so manipulation of the immune system to produce an enhanced anti-tumor response could be utilized as an adjuvant oncological therapy. Sevoflurane has proinflammatory effects, while propofol, has anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. Therefore, we compared the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with esophageal cancer under total intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia.
methodsThis study collected the electronic medical records of patients undergoing esophagectomy from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. According to the intraoperative anesthetics, the patients were divided into total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) group or inhalational anesthesia (INHA) group. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) was used to minimize differences. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was established to evaluate the correlation between different anesthesia methods in overall survival and disease-free survival of patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.
resultsA total of 420 patients with elective esophageal cancer were collected, including 363 patients eligible for study (TIVA, n = 147, INHA, n = 216). After SIPTW there were no significant differences between two groups in overall survival and disease-free survival. However, the adjuvant therapy was statistically significant in improving OS, and the degree of differentiation was correlated with OS and DFS.
conclusionsIn conclusion, there were no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival between total intravenous anesthesia and inhalational anesthesia in patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.
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.