Konstantis Georgios, Katsadouros Ilias, Tsaousi Georgia, Grosomanidis Vasileios, Pourzitaki Chryssa
Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Transplant Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45141 Essen, Germany.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Jul 12;61(7):1263. doi: 10.3390/medicina61071263.
: Lung cancer represents one of the principal causes of cancer-associated mortality worldwide. Despite the numerous novel therapeutic agents, surgical resection remains, in many cases, the mainstay treatment. A growing body of evidence indicates that the anesthetic technique of choice contributes to perioperative immunosuppression, thus having an impact on cancer recurrence and prognosis. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a thorough summary of the current literature regarding the modulation of the immune response induced by the various anesthetic techniques that are used in lung cancer surgery, with a particular emphasis on cellular immunity. : PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane databases were systematically searched from November 2023 up to March 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the eligibility criteria. : A total of seven RCTs were included. Four of the RCTs compared the administration of general anesthesia alone versus general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia. The subsequent meta-analysis showed that the combination of general and epidural anesthesia exerted a positive impact on the cell counts of the CD3+ cells (SMD -0.42, 95% Cl -0.70 to -0.13 24 h postoperatively and SMD -0.86 95% Cl -1.48 to -0.23 72 h postoperatively), the CD4+ cells (SMD -0.41 95% Cl -0.69 to -0.12 at the end of surgery and SMD -0.56 95% Cl -0.85 to -0.27 72 h later), and the CD4+/CD8+ ratio (SMD -0.31 95% Cl -0.59 to -0.02 immediately after surgery, SMD -0.50 95% Cl -0.86 to -0.14 24 h postoperatively, and SMD -0.60 95% Cl -0.89 to -0.31 72 h later). The pooled results regarding CD8+ and NK cell counts were inconclusive. The remaining three studies compared volatile-based anesthesia with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Due to disparities between these studies, qualitative analysis was inconclusive, whereas quantitative analysis was not feasible. : The supplementation of general anesthesia with epidural anesthesia favorably impacts CD3+ and CD4+ cell counts, as well as the CD4+/CD8+ ratio. The present results and the effects of anesthetic technique on other immune cells must be consolidated with further high-quality studies.
肺癌是全球癌症相关死亡的主要原因之一。尽管有众多新型治疗药物,但在许多情况下,手术切除仍是主要的治疗方法。越来越多的证据表明,选择的麻醉技术会导致围手术期免疫抑制,从而对癌症复发和预后产生影响。本系统评价的目的是全面总结当前关于肺癌手术中使用的各种麻醉技术诱导的免疫反应调节的文献,特别强调细胞免疫。从2023年11月到2024年3月,系统检索了PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane数据库,以确定符合纳入标准的随机对照试验(RCT)。共纳入7项RCT。其中4项RCT比较了单纯全身麻醉与全身麻醉联合硬膜外麻醉的效果。随后的荟萃分析表明,全身麻醉与硬膜外麻醉联合使用对术后24小时CD3+细胞计数(标准化均值差[SMD] -0.42,95%置信区间[Cl] -0.70至-0.13)、术后72小时CD3+细胞计数(SMD -0.86,95% Cl -1.48至-0.23)、手术结束时CD4+细胞计数(SMD -0.41,95% Cl -0.69至-0.12)、术后72小时CD4+细胞计数(SMD -0.56,95% Cl -0.85至-0.27)以及CD4+/CD8+比值(术后即刻SMD -0.31,95% Cl -0.59至-0.02;术后24小时SMD -0.50,95% Cl -0.86至-0.14;术后72小时SMD -0.60,95% Cl -0.89至-0.31)有积极影响。关于CD8+和自然杀伤(NK)细胞计数的汇总结果尚无定论。其余3项研究比较了挥发性麻醉与全静脉麻醉(TIVA)。由于这些研究之间存在差异,定性分析尚无定论,定量分析也不可行。全身麻醉联合硬膜外麻醉对CD3+和CD4+细胞计数以及CD4+/CD8+比值有积极影响。目前的结果以及麻醉技术对其他免疫细胞的影响必须通过进一步的高质量研究加以巩固。