ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2025
Epidural analgesia during esophagectomy and esophageal cancer prognosis: A population-based nationwide study in Finland.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Epidural analgesia during esophagectomy and esophageal cancer prognosis: A population-based nationwide study in Finland.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 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
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of epidural analgesia has been proposed to improve the prognosis of esophageal cancer by attenuating the stress response and being less immunosuppressive than opioids. This study aims to evaluate the association, if any, between non-epidural pain management compared to epidural analgesia during minimally invasive or open esophagectomy and esophageal cancer prognosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a population-based nationwide retrospective cohort study in Finland, using the Finnish National Esophago-Gastric Cancer Cohort (FINEGO). Esophagectomy patients with epidural and no epidural analgesia were compared. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) non-epidural pain management compared to epidural analgesia, adjusted for the calendar period of surgery, sex, age, comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index), tumor stage, tumor histology, neoadjuvant therapy, type of surgery, and esophageal cancer surgery volume.
resultsAfter exclusions, there were 1381 patients available with information on epidural analgesia. Of these, 969 (70.2%) were men and 832 (60.2%) had esophageal adenocarcinoma. After adjustment for confounding factors, non-epidural pain management was not associated with higher 90-day mortality (HR 1.022 95% CI 0.582-1.794), overall mortality up to 5 years (HR 1.156 95% CI 0.909-1.470), nor with 5 years cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.134 95% CI 0.884-1.456) compared to epidural analgesia.
conclusionAlthough the point estimates may hint at a potentially improved prognosis associated with epidural use, this population-based nationwide study suggests no statistically significant association between epidural analgesia during esophagectomy and esophageal cancer prognosis. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This large esophagectomy (cancer) cohort in Finland was used to compare those who received epidural analgesia with those who did not for associations with late mortality in a retrospective analysis and where anesthesia and analgesia treatments were not controlled. The findings showed that when other recognized risks for mortality were taken into account, there was not a meaningful difference in relative risk for late mortality related to the presence or absence of epidural analgesia, though the analgesia treatments were not randomly allocated. These results do not rule out associations of analgesia choice with other outcomes that might be important to patients.
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.