No abstract

Background: Intravenous and inhalational anesthesia might have different associations with long-term outcome in cancer patients, with reports of adverse effects of inhalation anesthesia. However, the effects of anesthesia in patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) are not known. Methods: This study investigated 154 patients who received propofol and 140 patients who received sevoflurane for maintenance of anesthesia during HGG tumor resection. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival. Results: Median progression-free survival was 10 months (interquartile range [IQR], 6 to 18) versus 11 months (IQR 6 to 20; P=0.674), and median overall survival was 18 months (IQR, 11 to 39) versus 18 months (IQR, 10 to 44; P=0.759) in patients maintained with propofol and sevoflurane, respectively. Higher preoperative Karnofsky performance status and postoperative chemotherapy were associated with a reduced hazard of tumor progression or death, whereas higher age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index and longer duration of anesthesia were associated with an increased hazard of progression or death. World Health Organization tumor classification IV and incomplete tumor resection were associated with an increased hazard of tumor progression but not death. Anesthesia maintenance with sevoflurane increased the risk of death in patients with Karnofsky performance status <80 compared with propofol (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.57; P=0.022). Conclusions: Compared with maintenance of anesthesia with propofol, sevoflurane did not worsen progression-free or overall survival in patients with HGG undergoing tumor resection. However, propofol might be beneficial in patients with poor preoperative Karnofsky performance status.

Background Sedation is commonly used in neurosurgical patients but has been reported to produce transient focal neurologic dysfunction. The authors hypothesized that in patients with frontal–parietal–temporal brain tumors, focal neurologic deficits are unmasked or exacerbated by nonspecific sedation independent of the drug used. Methods This was a prospective, randomized, single-blind, self-controlled design with parallel arms. With institutional approval, patients were randomly assigned to one of the four groups: “propofol,” “midazolam,” “fentanyl,” and “dexmedetomidine.” The sedatives were titrated by ladder administration to mild sedation but fully cooperative, equivalent to Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation score = 4. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was used to evaluate the neurologic function before and after sedation. The study’s primary outcome was the proportion of NIHSS-positive change in patients after sedation to Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation = 4. Results One hundred twenty-four patients were included. Ninety had no neurologic deficits at baseline. The proportion of NIHSS-positive change was midazolam 72%, propofol 52%, fentanyl 27%, and dexmedetomidine 23% (P less than 0.001 among groups). No statistical difference existed between propofol and midazolam groups (P = 0.108) or between fentanyl and dexmedetomidine groups (P = 0.542). Midazolam and propofol produced more sedative-induced focal neurologic deficits compared with fentanyl and dexmedetomidine. The neurologic function deficits were mainly limb motor weakness and ataxia. Patients with high-grade gliomas were more susceptible to the induced neurologic dysfunction regardless of the sedative. Conclusions Midazolam and propofol augmented or revealed neurologic dysfunction more frequently than fentanyl and dexmedetomidine at equivalent sedation levels. Patients with high-grade gliomas were more susceptible than those with low-grade gliomas.

This article is featured in "This Month in Anesthesiology," page 1A. This article is accompanied by an editorial on p. 5. This article has a related Infographic on p. 17A. This article has an audio podcast.