ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and combined inhalation and intravenous anesthesia on survival after tumor surgery: a propensity score matched cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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.
- Optimization of multimodal analgesic drug combinations under the concept of precision anesthesia.American journal of translational research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prior studies have indicated that inhalation anesthesia in cancer surgery might heighten the risk of tumor metastasis and diminish patient survival. Yet, combined inhalation and intravenous anesthesia (CIVA), a prevalent general anesthesia technique, remains underexplored regarding its influence on postoperative survival in cancer surgery patients. To fill this gap, this study compares the short-term and long-term mortality of cancer surgery patients receiving CIVA versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in China, comprising 25,351 patients who underwent cancer surgery under general anesthesia between January 2014 and December 2018. The primary outcomes were short-term mortality (within 3 months) and long-term mortality (within 3 years). CIVA and TIVA were the primary exposures. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to adjust for confounding factors, and Cox regression models were utilized to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality outcomes. Results: Among the 25,351 patients who underwent tumor resection, 23,790 were administered TIVA, while 1,561 received CIVA. In the 1:3 PSM cohort, 1,536 patients received CIVA, and 4,519 patients received TIVA. The Cox regression models for the 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3 PSM cohorts indicated that CIVA was associated with long-term mortality but not with short-term mortality. The multivariable Cox regression model following 1:3 PSM revealed that CIVA was associated with an increased risk of 3-year mortality (HR: 1.220; 95% CI: 1.043-1.404). Conclusion: Our results provided indirect evidence of potential hazard of inhaled anesthetics, even as a compound in CIVA, on long-term mortality after cancer surgery. Given the limitations of this retrospective study, further prospective work exploring the effect of anesthetic technique on mortality is urgently needed.
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.