Elena F Wurster1, Frank Pianka1, Rene Warschkow2,3, Pia Antony1, Thorsten Brenner4, Markus A Weigand4, Bruno M Schmied2, Markus W Büchler1, Ignazio Tarantino5, Alexis Ulrich6. 1. Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Department of General, Visceral, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacher Straße 95, 9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 3. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 305, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Department of General, Visceral, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacher Straße 95, 9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland. ignazio.tarantino@kssg.ch. 6. Surgical Department I, Städtische Kliniken Neuss Lukaskrankenhaus GmbH, Lukaskrankenhaus GmbH, Preußenstraße 84, 41464, Neuss, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the putative impact of peridural analgesia on oncological outcome in patients undergoing resection of stages I-IV colon cancer. METHODS: In a single-center study, 876 patients undergoing resection for primary colon cancer (AJCC stages I-IV) between 2001 and 2014 were analyzed. Mean follow-up of the entire cohort was 4.2 ± 3.5 years. Patients who did and did not receive peridural analgesia were compared using Cox regression and propensity score analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 208 patients (23.7%) received peridural analgesia. Patients' characteristics were biased with regard to the use of peridural analgesia (propensity score 0.296 ± 0.129 vs. 0.219 ± 0.108, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching, the use of peridural analgesia had no impact on overall (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.11, p = 0.175), cancer-specific (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.48-1.09, p = 0.111), and disease-free survival (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66-1.19, p = 0.430). The 5-year overall survival after propensity score matching was 60.9% (95% CI 54.8-67.7%) for patients treated with peridural analgesia compared with 54.1% (95% CI 49.5-59.1%) for patients not treated with peridural analgesia. Cancer-specific and disease-free survival showed similar non-significant results. CONCLUSIONS: Peridural analgesia in patients after colon cancer resection was not associated with a better oncological outcome after risk adjusting in multivariable Cox regression and propensity score analyses. Hence, oncological outcome should not serve as a reason for the use of peridural analgesia in patients with colon cancer.
PURPOSE: To assess the putative impact of peridural analgesia on oncological outcome in patients undergoing resection of stages I-IV colon cancer. METHODS: In a single-center study, 876 patients undergoing resection for primary colon cancer (AJCC stages I-IV) between 2001 and 2014 were analyzed. Mean follow-up of the entire cohort was 4.2 ± 3.5 years. Patients who did and did not receive peridural analgesia were compared using Cox regression and propensity score analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 208 patients (23.7%) received peridural analgesia. Patients' characteristics were biased with regard to the use of peridural analgesia (propensity score 0.296 ± 0.129 vs. 0.219 ± 0.108, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching, the use of peridural analgesia had no impact on overall (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.11, p = 0.175), cancer-specific (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.48-1.09, p = 0.111), and disease-free survival (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66-1.19, p = 0.430). The 5-year overall survival after propensity score matching was 60.9% (95% CI 54.8-67.7%) for patients treated with peridural analgesia compared with 54.1% (95% CI 49.5-59.1%) for patients not treated with peridural analgesia. Cancer-specific and disease-free survival showed similar non-significant results. CONCLUSIONS: Peridural analgesia in patients after colon cancer resection was not associated with a better oncological outcome after risk adjusting in multivariable Cox regression and propensity score analyses. Hence, oncological outcome should not serve as a reason for the use of peridural analgesia in patients with colon cancer.
Authors: P Sacerdote; M Bianchi; L Gaspani; B Manfredi; A Maucione; G Terno; M Ammatuna; A E Panerai Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Christopher L Wu; Seth R Cohen; Jeffrey M Richman; Andrew J Rowlingson; Genevieve E Courpas; Kristin Cheung; Elaina E Lin; Spencer S Liu Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Rose Christopherson; Kenneth E James; Mara Tableman; Prudence Marshall; Frank E Johnson Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 5.108