Search

Surgical excision of the primary tumor represents the most frequent and curative procedure for solid malignancies. Compelling evidence suggests that, despite its beneficial effects, surgery may impair immunosurveillance by triggering an immunosuppressive inflammatory stress response and favor recurrence by stimulating minimal residual disease. In addition, many factors interfere with the immune effectors before and after cancer procedures, such as malnutrition, anemia, or subsequent transfusion. Thus, the perioperative period plays a key role in determining oncological outcomes and represents a short phase to circumvent anesthetic and surgical deleterious factors by supporting the immune system through the use of synergistic pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. In line with this, accumulating studies indicate that anesthetic agents could drive both protumor or antitumor signaling pathways during or after cancer surgery. While preclinical investigations focusing on anesthetics’ impact on the behavior of cancer cells are quite convincing, limited clinical trials studying the consequences on survival and recurrences remain inconclusive. Herein, we highlight the main factors occurring during the perioperative period of cancer surgery and their potential impact on immunomodulation and cancer progression. We also discuss patient management prior to and during surgery, taking into consideration the latest advances in the literature.

Abstract Background Surgery is regarded as the primary treatment for breast cancer. Chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) is a recognised complication after breast cancer surgery, and it is estimated to affect 20–30% of women. Pain catastrophizing has emerged as one of the most influential psychological variables associated with CPSP. Methods This trial will be a single-centre, prospective, double-blinded, superiority, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Patients scheduled for elective breast cancer surgery (wide local excision or mastectomy with or without axillary lymph node dissection) will be screened preoperatively for high pain catastrophising. Patients with high pain catastrophising, defined as a score of ≥ 24 on the Pain Catastrophising Scale will be deemed eligible for inclusion in the study. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either a cognitive behavioural therapy or an educational mindfulness based programme during their perioperative period. The primary outcome is the Brief Pain Inventory short form average pain severity score at 3 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported quality of recovery at days 1–2 after surgery, levels of pain catastrophising, reported depressed mood and anxiety. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this protocol describes the first RCT which directly examines the effect of perioperative cognitive behavioural therapy on CPSP among breast cancer patients with high pain catastrophising characteristics. The outcomes of this trial may have significant implications for these patients because perioperative cognitive behavioural therapy has the potential to become an important perioperative intervention to complement patient management. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04924010 . Registered on 11 June 2021. All item from the World Health Organisation Trial Registration Data set have been included.

Abstract Background Compared to conventional thoracotomy, minimally invasive thoracic surgery (MITS) can reduce postoperative pain, reduce tissue trauma and contribute to better recovery. However, it still causes significant acute postoperative pain. Truncal regional anaesthesia techniques such as paravertebral and erector spinae blocks have shown to contribute to postoperative analgesia after MITS. Satisfactory placement of an ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral catheter can be technically challenging compared to an ultrasound-guided erector spinae catheter. However, in MITS, an opportunity arises for directly visualised placement of a paravertebral catheter by the surgeon under thoracoscopic guidance. Alongside with thoracic epidural, a paravertebral block is considered the “gold standard” of thoracic regional analgesic techniques. To the best of our knowledge, there are no randomised controlled trials comparing surgeon-administered paravertebral catheter and anaesthesiologist-assisted erector spinae catheter for MITS in terms of patient-centred outcomes such as quality of recovery. Methods This trial will be a prospective, double-blinded randomised controlled trial. A total of 80 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either an anaesthesiologist-assisted ultrasound-guided erector spinae catheter or a surgeon-assisted video-assisted paravertebral catheter, in a 1:1 ratio following induction of general anaesthesia for minimally assisted thoracic surgery. Both groups will receive the same standardised analgesia protocol for both intra- and postoperative periods. The primary outcome is defined as Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) score between the two groups at 24 h postoperative. Secondary outcomes include assessment of chronic persistent surgical pain (CPSP) at 3 months postoperative using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Short Form and Short Form McGill (SF-15) questionnaires, assessment of postoperative pulmonary function, area under the curve for Verbal Rating Score for pain at rest and on deep inspiration versus time over 48 h, total opioid consumption over 48 h, QoR-15 at 48 h, and postoperative complications and morbidity as measured by the Comprehensive Complication Index. Discussion Despite surgical advancements in thoracic surgery, severe acute postoperative pain following MITS is still prevailing. This study will provide recommendations about the efficacy of an anaesthesia-administered ultrasound-guided erector spinae catheter or surgeon-administered, video-assisted paravertebral catheter techniques for early quality of recovery following MITS. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04729712 . Registered on 28 January 2021. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set have been included.

Abstract Background Hypotension during anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery is common. Recent data suggest that there is an association between the lowest intra-operative blood pressure and mortality, even when adjusted for co-morbidities. This is consistent with data derived from the wider surgical population, where magnitude and duration of hypotension are associated with mortality and peri-operative complications. However, there are no trial to data to support more aggressive blood pressure control. Methods/design We are conducting a three-centre, randomised, double-blinded pilot study in three hospitals in the United Kingdom. The sample size will be 75 patients (25 from each centre). Randomisation will be done using computer-generated concealed tables. Both participants and investigators will be blinded to group allocation. Participants will be aged >70 years, cognitively intact (Abbreviated Mental Test Score 7 or greater), able to give informed consent and admitted directly through the emergency department with a fractured neck of the femur requiring operative repair. Patients randomised to tight blood pressure control or avoidance of intra-operative hypotension will receive active treatment as required to maintain both of the following: systolic arterial blood pressure >80% of baseline pre-operative value and mean arterial pressure >75 mmHg throughout. All participants will receive standard hospital care, including spinal or general anaesthesia, at the discretion of the clinical team. The primary outcome is a composite of the presence or absence of defined cardiovascular, renal and delirium morbidity within 7 days of surgery (myocardial injury, stroke, acute kidney injury, delirium). Secondary endpoints will include the defined individual morbidities, mortality, early mobility and discharge to usual residence. Discussion This is a small-scale pilot study investigating the feasibility of a trial of tight intra-operative blood pressure control in a frail elderly patient group with known high morbidity and mortality. Positive findings will provide the basis for a larger-scale study. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry identifier: ISRCTN89812075 . Registered on 30 August 2016.

The question of whether anesthetic, analgesic or other perioperative intervention during cancer resection surgery might influence long-term oncologic outcomes has generated much attention over the past 13 years. A wealth of experimental and observational clinical data have been published, but the results of prospective, randomized clinical trials are awaited. The European Union supports a pan-European network of researchers, clinicians and industry partners engaged in this question (COST Action 15204: Euro-Periscope). In this narrative review, members of the Euro-Periscope network briefly summarize the current state of evidence pertaining to the potential effects of the most commonly deployed anesthetic and analgesic techniques and other non-surgical interventions during cancer resection surgery on tumor recurrence or metastasis.