Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25548913›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Comparison of combined general-epidural anesthesia with general anesthesia effects on survival and cancer recurrence: a meta-analysis of retrospective and prospective studies.

Lijian Pei, Gang Tan, Lei Wang, Wenjuan Guo, Bo Xiao, Xianli Gao, Li Wang, Hong Li, Zhonghuang Xu, Xiuhua Zhang and 3 more

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02801409 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Epidural Anesthesia-analgesia on Long-term Survival in Patients After Lung Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorPeking University First HospitalRan2015 to 2019Enrolled400ConditionsLung Cancer, Thoracic Surgery, Anesthesia, Epidural, Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalArmsGeneral anesthesia alone, Combined epidural-general anesthesia
NCT03193710 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of the Effects of Total Intravenous Anesthesia and Inhalation Anesthesia on Lymphocytes in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Resection and the Mechanism Involved: a Single-center, Randomized, Prospective Study

TypeobservationalSponsorGuizhi DuRan2017 to 2023Enrolled260ConditionsColorectal Cancer Metastatic, Survival Rate, General Anesthetics Toxicity, Lymphocyte DestructionArmsPropofol, Sevoflurane, Remifentanil
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Anaesthesia as an influence in tumour progression.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Lijian PeiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Gang TanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Lei WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Wenjuan GuoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Bo XiaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Xianli GaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Li WangDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & School of Basic Medicine Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100005, PR China.
Hong LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Zhonghuang XuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Xiuhua ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Jing ZhaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Jie YiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.
Yuguang HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAnimals underwent combined general-epidural anesthesia (EGA) is reported to have better long-time outcome than general anesthesia (GA). This study aimed to make overall evaluation of the association between these two anesthetic techniques and prognosis of cancer patients undergoing surgery.

methodsRelated databases such as PubMed and EMbase were searched for eligible studies that evaluated the influence of EGA and GA on the prognosis of cancer patients undergoing surgery. Selected studies were evaluated according to the inclusion criteria by two reviewers respectively, followed by data extraction and quality assessment. The odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the influence strength of EGA and GA on prognosis of cancer patients.

resultsA total of ten studies involving 3254 patients were included. The overall results demonstrated that there was no significant difference between EGA and GA group (OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06, P = 0.187) concerning postoperative recurrence and metastasis rate. In regard to the following two factors: cancer category and time of follow-up, subgroup analysis identified significant differences between EGA and GA in the group of patients with prostate cancer and the group with follow-up less than or equal to two years (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.95, P = 0.027; OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98, P = 0.035; respectively) concerning postoperative recurrence and metastasis rate. However, no significant difference was found in the group of patients with colorectal cancer (OR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.84-1.33, P = 0.62).

conclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that EGA might be associated with improvement in prognosis of patients with operable prostate cancer and the cancer patients with follow-up less than or equal to two years. However, no obvious relationship between the improvement in prognosis of colorectal cancer and EGA were detected, comparing to GA. Furthermore, all the results should be interpreted cautiously, as heterogeneous data were used for analyzing.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, EpiduralAnesthesia, GeneralBreast NeoplasmsMethyl EthersPropofolAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSevofluraneMethyl EthersPropofolSevoflurane

Identifiers

PMID25548913
PMCPMC4280190

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.