| 41. |
|
|
| 42. |
- Eklund, Arne, 1957-, et al.
(författare)
-
Low Recurrence Rate After Laparoscopic (TEP) and Open(Lichtenstein) Inguinal Hernia RepairA Randomized, Multicenter Trial With 5-Year Follow-Up
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Annals of Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 249:1, s. 33-38
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To compare a laparoscopic (totally extraperitoneal patch (TEP)) and an open technique (Lichtenstein) for inguinal hernia repair regarding recurrence rate and possible risk factors for recurrence. Summary Background Data: Laparoscopic hernia repair has been introduced as an alternative to open repair. Short-term follow-up suggests benefits for those patients operated with a laparoscopic approach compared with open techniques; ie, less postoperative pain and a shorter convalescence period. Long-term results, however, are less well known. Methods: The study was conducted as a multicenter randomized trial with a 5-year follow-up. A total of 1512 men aged 30 to 70 years, with a primary unilateral inguinal hernia, were randomized to either TEP or Lichtenstein repair. Results: Overall, 665 patients in the TEP group and 705 patients in the Lichtenstein group were evaluable. The cumulative recurrence rate was 3.5% in the TEP group and 1.2% in the Lichtenstein group (P = 0.008). Test for heterogeneity revealed significant differences between individual surgeons. The exclusion of 1 surgeon, who was responsible for 33% (7 of 21) of all recurrences in the TEP group, lowered the cumulative recurrence rate to 2.4% in this group, which was not statistically different from that of the Lichtenstein group. Conclusions: The recurrence rate for both TEP and Lichtenstein repair was low. A higher cumulative recurrence rate in the TEP group was seen at 5 years. Further analysis revealed that this could be attributable to incorrect surgical technique.
|
|
| 43. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of general anaesthesia on breast cancer survival: a 5-year follow up of a pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial, the CAN-study, comparing propofol and sevoflurane
- 2023
-
Ingår i: EClinicalMedicine. - : Elsevier. - 2589-5370. ; 60
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Anaesthesia may impact long-term cancer survival. In the Cancer and Anaesthesia study, we hypothesised that the hypnotic drug propofol will have an advantage of at least five percentage points in five-year survival over the inhalational anaesthetic sevoflurane for breast cancer surgery. Methods From 2118 eligible breast cancer patients scheduled for primary curable, invasive breast cancer surgery, 1764 were recruited after ethical approval and individual informed consent to this open label, single-blind, randomised trial at four county- and three university hospitals in Sweden and one Chinese university hospital. Of surveyed patients, 354 were excluded, mainly due to refusal to participate. Patients were randomised by computer at the monitoring organisation to general anaesthesia maintenance with either intravenous propofol or inhaled sevoflurane in a 1:1 ratio in permuted blocks. Data related to anaesthesia, surgery, oncology, and demographics were registered. The primary endpoint was five-year overall survival. Data are presented as Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Hazard Ratios based on Cox univariable regression analyses by both intention-to-treat and perprotocol. EudraCT, 2013-002380-25 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01975064. Findings Of 1764 patients, included from December 3, 2013, to September 29, 2017, 1670 remained for analysis. The numbers who survived at least five years were 773/841 (91.9% (95% CI 90.1-93.8)) in the propofol group and 764/829 (92.2% (90.3-94.0)) in the sevoflurane group, (HR 1.03 (0.73-1.44); P = 0.875); the corresponding results in the per-protocol-analysis were: 733/798 (91.9% (90.0-93.8)) and 653/710 (92.0% (90.0-94.0)) (HR = 1.01 (0.71-1.44); P = 0.955). Survival after a median follow-up of 76.7 months did not indicate any difference between the groups (HR 0.97, 0.72-1.29; P = 0.829, log rank test). Interpretation No difference in overall survival was found between general anaesthesia with propofol or sevoflurane for breast cancer surgery. Copyright (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
| 44. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term survival after volatile or propofol general anesthesia for bladder cancer surgery : a retrospective national registry cohort study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Anesthesiology. - : American Society of Anesthesiologists. - 0003-3022 .- 1528-1175. ; 140:6, s. 1126-1133
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Prospective interventional trials and retrospective observational analyses provide conflicting evidence regarding the relationship between propofol versus inhaled volatile general anesthesia and long-term survival after cancer surgery. In specific, bladder cancer surgery lacks prospective clinical trial evidence.METHODS: Data on bladder cancer surgery performed under general anesthesia between 2014 and 2021 from The National Quality Registry for Urinary Tract and Bladder Cancer and the Swedish Perioperative Registry were record-linked. Overall survival was compared between patients receiving propofol or inhaled volatile for anesthesia maintenance. The minimum clinically important difference was defined as a five-percentage point difference in five-year survival.RESULTS: Of 7,571 subjects, 4,519 (59.7%) received an inhaled volatile anesthetic and 3,052 (40.3%) received propofol for general anesthesia maintenance. The two groups were quite similar in most respects but differed in ASA physical status and tumor stage. Propensity score matching was used to address treatment bias. Survival did not differ during follow-up (median 45 months [interquartile range, 33 to 62]) in neither the full unmatched cohort, nor following 1:1 propensity score matching (3,052 matched pairs). The Kaplan-Meier adjusted five-year survival rates in the matched cohort were 898/3,052, 67.5% (65.7-69.3) for propofol and 852/3,052, 68.5% (66.7-70.4) for inhaled volatile general anesthesia, respectively (hazard ratio 1.05 [95% CI: 0.96 to 1.15], P = 0.332). A sensitivity analysis restricted to 1,766 propensity score matched pairs of patients who received only one general anesthetic during the study period did not demonstrate a difference in survival; Kaplan-Meier adjusted five-year-survival rates were 521/1,766, 67.1% (64.7-69.7) and 482/1,766, 68.9% (66.5-71.4) for propofol and inhaled volatile general anesthesia, respectively (hazard ratio 1.09 [95% CI: 0.97 to 1.23], P = 0.139).CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery under general anesthesia, there was no statistically significant difference in long-term overall survival associated with the choice of propofol or an inhaled volatile maintenance.
|
|
| 45. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale and Design of the CAN Study : An RCT of Survival after Propofol- or Sevoflurane-based Anesthesia for Cancer Surgery
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Current pharmaceutical design. - : BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD. - 1381-6128 .- 1873-4286. ; 25:28, s. 3028-3033
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Based on animal data only, some clinicians have adopted pmpofol-based anesthesia for cancer surgery with the aim of increased survival.Objective: Our objective is to verify or refute the hypothesis that survival increases after cancer surgery with propofol compared with sevoflurane for anesthesia maintenance. This aim deserves a large-scale randomized study. The primary hypothesis is an absolute increase of minimum 5%-units in 1- and 5-year survival with propofol-based anesthesia for breast or colorectal cancer after radical surgery, compared with sevoflurane-based anesthesia.Method: Ethics and medical agency approvals were received and pre-study registrations at clinicaltrial.gov and EudraCT were made for our now ongoing prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter study. A power analysis based on a retrospective study, including a safety margin for drop outs, resulted in a total requirement of 8,000 patients. The initial inclusion period constituted a feasibility phase with an emphasis on the functionality of the infrastructure at the contributing centers and at the monitoring organization, as well as on protocol adherence.Conclusion: The infrastructure and organization work smoothly at the different contributing centers. Protocol adherence is good, and the monitors are satisfied. We expect this trial to be able to either verify or refute that propofol is better than sevoflurane for cancer surgery.
|
|
| 46. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Survival after primary breast cancer surgery following propofol or sevoflurane general anesthesia-A retrospective, multicenter, database analysis of 6305 Swedish patients
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0001-5172 .- 1399-6576. ; 64:8, s. 1048-1054
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Retrospective studies indicate that the choice of anesthetic can affect long-term cancer survival. Propofol seems to have an advantage over sevoflurane. However, this is questioned for breast cancer. We gathered a large cohort of breast cancer surgery patients from seven Swedish hospitals and hypothesized that general anesthesia with propofol would be superior to sevoflurane anesthesia regarding long-term breast cancer survival.Methods: We identified all patients who were anaesthetized for breast cancer surgery between 2006 and 2012. The patients were matched to the Swedish Breast Cancer Quality Register, to retrieve tumor characteristics, prognostic factors, and adjuvant treatment as well as date of death. Overall survival between patients undergoing sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia was analyzed with different statistical approaches: (a) multiple Cox regression models adjusted for demographic, oncological, and multiple control variables, (b) propensity score matching on the same variables, but also including the participating centers as a cofactor in a separate analysis.Results: The database analysis identified 6305 patients. The 5-year survival rates were 91.0% and 81.8% for the propofol and sevoflurane group, respectively, in the final model (P = .126). Depending on the statistical adjustment method used, different results were obtained, from a non-significant to a "proposed" and even a "determined" difference in survival that favored propofol, with a maximum of 9.2 percentage points higher survival rate at 5 years (hazard ratio 1.46, 95% CI 1.10-1.95).Conclusions: It seems that propofol may have a survival advantage compared with sevoflurane among breast cancer patients, but the inherent weaknesses of retrospective analyses were made apparent.
|
|
| 47. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
The choice of anaesthetic - sevoflurane or propofol - and outcome from cancer surgery : a retrospective analysis
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences. - : Uppsala Medical Society. - 0300-9734 .- 2000-1967. ; 119:3, s. 251-261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND:Commonly used inhalational hypnotics, such as sevoflurane, are pro-inflammatory, whereas the intravenously administered hypnotic agent propofol is anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative. A few clinical studies have indicated similar effects in patients. We examined the possible association between patient survival after radical cancer surgery and the use of sevoflurane or propofol anaesthesia.PATIENTS AND METHODS:Demographic, anaesthetic, and surgical data from 2,838 patients registered for surgery for breast, colon, or rectal cancers were included in a database. This was record-linked to regional clinical quality registers. Cumulative 1- and 5-year overall survival rates were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and estimates were compared between patients given propofol (n = 903) or sevoflurane (n = 1,935). In a second step, Cox proportional hazard models were calculated to assess the risk of death adjusted for potential effect modifiers and confounders.RESULTS:Differences in overall 1- and 5-year survival rates for all three sites combined were 4.7% (p = 0.004) and 5.6% (p < 0.001), respectively, in favour of propofol. The 1-year survival for patients operated for colon cancer was almost 10% higher after propofol anaesthesia. However, after adjustment for several confounders, the observed differences were not statistically significant.CONCLUSION:Propofol anaesthesia might be better in surgery for some cancer types, but the retrospective design of this study, with uneven distributions of several confounders, distorted the picture. These uncertainties emphasize the need for a randomized controlled trial.
|
|
| 48. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Volatile versus Propofol General Anesthesia and Long-term Survival after Breast Cancer Surgery : A National Registry Retrospective Cohort Study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Anesthesiology. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-3022 .- 1528-1175. ; 137:3, s. 315-326
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Several retrospective studies using administrative or single-center data have failed to show any difference between general anesthesia using propofol versus inhaled volatiles on long-term survival after breast cancer surgery. Although randomized controlled trials are ongoing, validated data from national clinical registries may advance the reliability of existing knowledge.Methods: Data on breast cancer surgery performed under general anesthesia between 2013 and 2019 from the Swedish PeriOperative Registry and the National Quality Registry for Breast Cancer were record-linked. Overall survival was compared between patients receiving propofol and patients receiving inhaled volatile for anesthesia maintenance.Results: Of 18,674 subjects, 13,873 patients (74.3%) received propofol and 4,801 (25.7%) received an inhaled volatile for general anesthesia maintenance. The two cohorts differed in most respects. Patients receiving inhaled volatile were older (67 yr vs. 65 yr), sicker (888 [19.0%] American Society of Anesthesiologists status 3 to 5 vs. 1,742 [12.8%]), and the breast cancer to be more advanced. Median follow-up was 33 months (interquartile range, 19 to 48). In the full, unmatched cohort, there was a statistically significantly higher overall survival among patients receiving propofol (13,489 of 13,873 [97.2%]) versus inhaled volatile ( 4,039 of 4,801 [84.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.90; P < 0.001). After 1:1 propensity score matching (4,658 matched pairs), there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (propofol 4,284 of 4,658 [92.0%]) versus inhaled volatile (4,288 of 4,658 [92.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.13; P = 0.756).Conclusions: Among patients undergoing breast cancer surgery under general anesthesia, no association was observed between the choice of propofol or an inhaled volatile maintenance and overall survival.
|
|
| 49. |
- Eriksson, Jonathan, et al.
(författare)
-
Preoperative MRI in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer: re-excision rates and additional findings
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- AbstractBackground: Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is still controversial as an adjunct to conventional breast cancer workup in terms of the effect on re-excision rates. Our objective was to analyse whether the introduction of preoperative breast MRI influences the rate of re-excisions in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer and to study the additional ipsi- and contralateral MRI findings and their impact on surgical management.Methods: Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer having preoperative MRI and surgery at Vastmanland County Hospital Breast Unit from January–June 2018 (n = 84) were compared with women not undergoing preoperative MRI from January–June 2016 (n = 97). Data were collected from retrospective reviews of patients’ medical records.Results: The re-excision rate was one of 84 (1.2%) in 2018 and three of 97 (3.1%) in 2016. There was no statistically significant difference in re-excision rates between the two study periods. In the MRI cohort, seven patients of 84 (8%) had malignancy in the ipsilateral and two (2%) in the contralateral breast not previously detected by conventional imaging. Additional malignant findings were more common in women of age < 59 years, and more often resulted in mastectomy.Conclusions: Preoperative breast MRI in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer did not reduce the number of re-excisions. Additional malignant findings were more common in women younger than 59 years and influenced surgical management. MRI resulted in no delay of surgery.
|
|
| 50. |
- Frisk, Jessica, 1971-
(författare)
-
Acupuncture treatment for hot flushes in women with breast cancer and men with prostate cancer
- 2011
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: The group of women and men with a history of cancer and distressing hot flushes and sweating is growing. The flushes negatively affect Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), perhaps partially by disturbing sleep. Treatments that are effective, tolerable and safe need to be developed. There are a number of treatment alternatives that are often not very effective or associated with more or less serious side-effects. Based on theories on the mechanisms behind hot flushes and acupuncture, treatment with acupuncture has been tried in menopausal women with hot flushes and in a few studies in women with breast cancer (BCa).Aim: The general aim of the research leading to this thesis was to evaluate the effect of acupuncture on hot flushes, HRQoL and sleep in men with prostate cancer (PCa) and women with BCa. To evaluate the effect in women with BCa of 12 weeks of electrostimulated acupuncture (EA) and two years of hormone therapy (HT) on number of, and distress caused by, hot flushes, and on HRQoL and sleep. To evaluate whether acupuncture therapy could be used to treat hot flushes in men with PCa treated with castration therapy, and then to evaluate in men with PCa and hot flushes the effect of 12 weeks of traditional acupuncture (TA) or EA on number of, and distress caused by, hot flushes and on urinary excretion of CGRP, HRQoL and sleep.Subjects and methods: Forty-five women with a history of BCa were randomized to oral HT for two years or EA for 12 weeks and were followed up till two years after start of therapy. Thirty-eight men with PCa and hot flushes were treated with acupuncture. Seven men were treated with EA for 10 to 12 weeks in a pilot study. After positive results from this study 31 men were randomized between EA and TA for 12 weeks and followed up till nine months after end of treatment. Hot flushes, HRQoL and sleep were monitored by means of log books and validated questionnaires.Results: The pilot study showed that 10 to 12 weeks of EA in men with PCa reduced number of hot flushes to below 50% of baseline with persistent effects at a follow up three months later. The two randomized studies showed that treatment with acupuncture in women with a history of BCa, and men with PCa was associated with a decrease in both the number of and distress caused by hot flushes by at least 50%. HT almost eliminated the hot flushes. There was no difference in reduction of hot flushes between men receiving EA or TA. Reduction of the number of hot flushes and distress caused by hot flushes probably leads to decreased disturbances at night, and was associated in women with a significant improvement in HRQoL and sleep variables. The improvement in HRQoL was as great in women treated with EA as in women receiving HT although the latter group had a more substantial reduction in number of flushes than the EA group suggesting that EA might have other effects in addition to those on hot flushes. In the men HRQoL did not change significantly. We saw very few and non-serious side-effects in the acupuncture groups and no signs that acupuncture activated the cancer or ovarian/testicular function.Conclusions: Acupuncture reduced the number of hot flushes and distress caused by hot flushes with at least 50% in women and men with hot flushes and a cancer disease and also improved HRQoL and sleep at least in women. Acupuncture should be further evaluated in these patient groups and could be a treatment alternative in patients with troublesome symptoms.
|
|
