Suppr超能文献

麻醉师选择吸入麻醉与静脉麻醉对胶质母细胞瘤患者的生存无影响。

The anesthetist's choice of inhalational vs. intravenous anesthetics has no impact on survival of glioblastoma patients.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.

Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

出版信息

Neurosurg Rev. 2021 Oct;44(5):2707-2715. doi: 10.1007/s10143-020-01452-7. Epub 2020 Dec 22.

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.

摘要

最近的数据表明,在切除实体肿瘤时使用的麻醉类型会影响患者的长期生存,全凭静脉麻醉(TIVA)优于吸入麻醉(INHA)。在这里,我们试图在接受胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)切除术的患者中查询这种对生存的影响。所有在海德堡大学医院神经外科接受新诊断的 IDH1-野生型 GBM 选择性切除术并接受全身麻醉的患者均纳入本研究。根据应用的麻醉技术对患者进行分组。为了调整潜在的预后混杂因素,按照已知的预后因素,采用 1:2 的比例(TIVA 与 INHA)对患者进行匹配:年龄、切除范围、O-6-甲基鸟嘌呤-DNA-甲基转移酶(MGMT)-启动子甲基化状态、术前卡诺夫斯基表现指数和辅助放疗和化疗。主要终点是无进展生存期(PFS),次要终点是总生存期(OS)。在研究期间,576 例患者接受了新诊断的 IDH-野生型 GBM 切除术。有不完整随访数据、姑息治疗、急诊或清醒手术的患者 54 例留在 TIVA 组,417 例留在 INHA 组。匹配后,TIVA 组有 52 例患者,INHA 组有 92 例患者。两组的中位 PFS 均为 6 个月。TIVA 组的中位 OS 为 13.5 个月,INHA 组的中位 OS 为 13.0 个月。在调整已知预后因素前后,均未发现麻醉类型与生存相关的显著差异。这项回顾性研究支持了这样一种观点,即在切除 IDH-野生型 GBM 期间使用的当前麻醉方法不会影响患者的生存。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/169e/8490243/bc8e1c71744b/10143_2020_1452_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验