支曉雁 薛小云 田毅
[摘要] 目的 系統(tǒng)性評價全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉與單純?nèi)砺樽韺ξ赴└涡g(shù)術(shù)后疼痛及預(yù)后比較,并進行meta分析。 方法 計算機檢索Cochrane圖書館、PubMed數(shù)據(jù)庫、MEDLINE數(shù)據(jù)庫、EMBASE數(shù)據(jù)庫、中國生物醫(yī)學(xué)文獻數(shù)據(jù)庫及CNKI數(shù)據(jù)庫,檢索時間從建庫開始至2018年1月。中文檢索詞:全身麻醉、硬膜外麻醉、胃癌、胃惡性腫瘤、胃切除、病例對照研究、隊列研究、隨機對照試驗;英文檢索詞:epidural anesthesia,general anesthesia,gastric cancer。文獻篩查及資料提取由2名工作人員獨立進行,篩查結(jié)果及數(shù)據(jù)提取由第3名工作人員核對,若存在不一致則進行討論,達成一致。主要觀察指標為:患者生存率,肺部感染發(fā)生率等并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生情況及住院時間。 結(jié)果 最終納入8篇研究,共5105例患者,其中接受全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉1817例,接受單純?nèi)砺樽淼幕颊?288例。meta分析結(jié)果顯示,兩種麻醉方式對生存率改善,差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(HR = 0.78,95%CI:0.60,1.01,P > 0.05)。全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組肺部感染的發(fā)生率低于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M(RR = 0.28,95%CI:0.15,0.52),住院時間短于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M(MD = -1.50,95%CI:-2.62,-0.39),差異均有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(均P < 0.05)。 結(jié)論 全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉可能改善胃癌根治術(shù)后患者生存率和肺部感染率,縮短住院時間。以上結(jié)論可能存在混雜偏倚和檢測偏倚,臨床使用時需謹慎。更加明確結(jié)論有待大樣本隨機對照試驗驗證。
[關(guān)鍵詞] 全身麻醉;全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉;胃癌;Meta分析
[中圖分類號] R614? ? ? ? ? [文獻標識碼] A? ? ? ? ? [文章編號] 1673-7210(2020)02(a)-0117-06
[Abstract] Objective To systematically evaluate the effects of general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia alone on postoperative pain and prognosis of radical gastrectomy, and to conduct meta-analysis. Methods The Cochrane library, PubMed database, MEDLINE database, EMBASE database, Chinese biomedical literature database and CNKI database were searched by computer from the establishment of the database to January 2018. Chinese search words: general anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, gastric cancer, gastric malignancy, gastrectomy, case-control study, cohort study, randomized controlled trial. English search words: epidural anesthesia, general anesthesia, gastric cancer. Literature screening and data extraction were conducted independently by 2 staff members. The results of screening and data extraction shall be checked by the third staff member. If there was any discrepancy, it shall be discussed and agreed upon. Main outcome measures: survival rate, incidence of pulmonary infection and length of hospital stays. Results Eight studies were included, including a total of 5105 patients receiving radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. 1817 patients receiving general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia and 3288 patients receiving general anesthesia alone. Meta-analysis showed that, there was no significant difference in survival rate between the two anesthesia methods (HR = 0.78, 95%CI:0.60, 1.01, P > 0.05). The incidence of pulmonary infection under general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia was lower than that under general anesthesia alone(RR = 0.28, 95%CI:0.15, 0.52), and the length of hospital stays were shorter than that under general anesthesia alone (MD = -1.50, 95%CI:-2.62, -0.39), with statistically significant differences (all P < 0.05). Conclusion General anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia may improve the survival rate of patients after radical gastrectomy and pulmonary infection rate, and shorten hospital stays. The above conclusions may have confounding bias and detection bias, which should be used with caution in clinical practice. More specific conclusions need to be confirmed by a large randomized controlled trial.
[Key words] General anesthesia; General anesthesia combine with epidural anesthesia; Gastric cancer; Meta-analysis
在我國胃癌的發(fā)病率居惡性腫瘤的第二位,且死亡率也不斷攀升[1]。手術(shù)是治療胃癌的主要方式,胃癌根治術(shù)是指將原發(fā)腫瘤連同轉(zhuǎn)移淋巴結(jié)及受累的浸潤組織一并切除,提高治愈率。但其存在創(chuàng)傷大、涉及的區(qū)域神經(jīng)叢多、極易出現(xiàn)并發(fā)癥和嚴重的術(shù)后疼痛等缺點。胃癌術(shù)后約50%的患者易合并呼吸道感染[2],而合理的麻醉方式或鎮(zhèn)痛方式有利于減輕術(shù)后疼痛,促進術(shù)后早期活動,減少術(shù)后并發(fā)癥(如肺部感染、血栓栓塞等)[3-4]。Cakmakkaya等[5]比較了全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉與單純?nèi)砺樽韺τ诟纳粕细共渴中g(shù)患者的生存情況比較,但并未發(fā)現(xiàn)麻醉方式對胃癌根治術(shù)的術(shù)后影響。本文旨在通過搜集相關(guān)研究,系統(tǒng)評價全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉與單純?nèi)砺樽韺τ谖赴└涡g(shù)后患者的生存率及安全性等差異。
1 資料與方法
1.1 文獻納入及排除標準
納入標準:所有對照研究,包括隨機對照試驗,臨床對照試驗及隊列研究。排除標準:①中文雜志非北大中文核心期刊目錄收錄;②非臨床性文獻,綜述性文獻;③信息不全無法使用的文獻。
1.2 文獻檢索
計算機檢索Cochrane圖書館、PubMed數(shù)據(jù)庫、MEDLINE數(shù)據(jù)庫、EMBASE數(shù)據(jù)庫、中國生物醫(yī)學(xué)文獻數(shù)據(jù)庫及CNKI數(shù)據(jù)庫,檢索時間從建庫至2018年1月。中文檢索詞:全身麻醉、硬膜外麻醉、胃癌、胃惡性腫瘤、胃切除、病例對照研究、隊列研究、隨機對照試驗;英文檢索詞:epidural anesthesia,general anesthesia,gastric cancer。采取自由詞與主題詞相結(jié)合的策略,盡量查找同義詞并追溯相關(guān)研究的參考文獻。語言限制為英語或者漢語,人種不限。
1.3 研究方法
1.3.1 文獻篩查及資料提取? 2名工作人員獨立進行文獻的篩查與資料提取。首先閱讀文獻題目及摘要,進行初步篩查;可能符合要求的文獻進行全文篩查。初步篩查和全文篩查前均進行預(yù)篩查,確保篩查者對納入排除標準理解一致;數(shù)據(jù)提取的條目包括:研究一般信息(發(fā)表年份、地區(qū)、研究時段、樣本量),患者特征(年齡、手術(shù)方式),干預(yù)特征(麻醉方式、麻醉用藥)及結(jié)局指標。篩查結(jié)果及數(shù)據(jù)提取由第3名工作人員核對,若存在不一致則進行討論,達成一致。
1.3.2 文獻質(zhì)量評價? 隨機對照試驗或前瞻性臨床對照試驗采用Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions[6]提供的偏倚風險評估工具進行評價。評價內(nèi)容包括:①隨機序列產(chǎn)生;②分配隱藏;③實施者與參與者實施盲法;④結(jié)果測評者實施盲法;⑤不完整數(shù)據(jù)報告;⑥選擇性報告數(shù)據(jù);⑦其他偏倚來源。隊列研究則采用Newcastle-Ottawa Cohort質(zhì)量評價量表[7],評價樣本代表性和選擇,組間可比性以及結(jié)局指標測量如盲法、隨訪時長、失訪數(shù)據(jù)等三方面偏倚風險。
1.4 統(tǒng)計學(xué)方法
采用Revman 5.3統(tǒng)計學(xué)軟件進行數(shù)據(jù)分析,二分類變量采用相對危險度(RR)及95%CI表示。生存資料采用風險比(HR)及95%CI表示。連續(xù)性變量采用均值差(MD)和95%CI表示。異質(zhì)性檢驗采用I2及χ2檢驗P值表示;I2≥50%,P < 0.1,提示存在統(tǒng)計學(xué)異質(zhì)性,采用隨機效應(yīng)模型進行meta分析;反之存在統(tǒng)計學(xué)同質(zhì)性,則采用固定效應(yīng)模型進行meta分析。
2 結(jié)果
2.1 納入文獻及基本信息
檢索共獲取文獻344篇,最終納入8篇文獻,包括中文文獻[8-11]及英文文獻[12-15]各4篇,見圖1。8篇文獻共包括5105例患者,其中全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉1817例,單純?nèi)砺樽?288例。7項研究來自中國[8-12,14-15],1項研究來自日本[13],見表1。
2.2 文獻質(zhì)量評價
共納入3篇隊列研究[13-15],5篇隨機對照試驗[8-12]。5篇隨機對照試驗中,僅2篇[10-11]提及隨機方法為隨機數(shù)字表法,其他研究均未提及且研究均不存在脫落情況,但所有研究均未提及隨機方案是否隱藏,結(jié)局指標測量者是否被盲,也未提供方案注冊的信息,見圖2。3篇隊列研究[13-15]評分均在7分,因研究選擇樣本具備代表性,未刻意排除亞組人群,暴露組與非暴露組定義清晰,并且組間人群基線可比性好,脫落人數(shù)較少,見表2。
2.3 meta分析
2.3.1 兩種麻醉方式生存率比較? 2篇文獻[14-15]研究兩種麻醉方式對胃癌患者生存率的影響;I2=73%,P = 0.06,存在統(tǒng)計學(xué)異質(zhì)性,采用隨機效應(yīng)模型分析。結(jié)果顯示兩種麻醉方式對生存率改善,差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P > 0.05)。見圖3。
2.3.2 兩種麻醉方式術(shù)后疼痛程度? 3篇文獻[10,11,14]研究兩種麻醉方式術(shù)后疼痛的程度。由于報道形式不統(tǒng)一,無法進行meta合并。Wang等[10]研究結(jié)果顯示,全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組術(shù)后6、12 h VAS評分低于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M,差異有高度統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P < 0.01);但兩組術(shù)后24 h VAS評分比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P > 0.05)。Liu等[11]研究結(jié)果顯示,全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組靜息和咳嗽時VAS評分低于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M,差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P < 0.05)。Wang等[14]研究結(jié)果顯示,全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組術(shù)后1~3 d VAS評分低于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M,差異有高度統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P < 0.01)。
2.2.3 兩種麻醉方式不良反應(yīng)和并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生情況? 6篇文獻[8-11,13-14]研究兩種麻醉方式不良反應(yīng)和并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生情況。3篇文獻[8-9,11]研究兩種麻醉方式出現(xiàn)肺部感染的情況;I2=0%,P < 0.0001,存在統(tǒng)計學(xué)同質(zhì)性,采用固定效應(yīng)模型進行分析。結(jié)果顯示全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組肺部感染的發(fā)生率低于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M,差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P < 0.05)。
2.3.4 兩種麻醉方式住院時間比較? 2篇文獻[11,13]研究兩種麻醉方式住院時間。I2=0%,P = 0.008,存在統(tǒng)計學(xué)同質(zhì)性,采用固定效應(yīng)模型進行分析。結(jié)果顯示,全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組住院時間短于單純?nèi)砺樽斫M,差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P > 0.05)。見圖5。
3 討論
胃癌根治術(shù)的麻醉方式以全身麻醉和全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉為主。全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉與單純?nèi)砺樽碓谏媛史矫娌町愲m不具備統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義,也無法定論兩種麻醉方式對生存率的影響。因為結(jié)果可能由使用隨機效應(yīng)模型引起。兩研究樣本量懸殊較大,但隨機效應(yīng)模型賦予兩種研究相似權(quán)重,當采用固定效應(yīng)模型,給予第一個大樣本研究更多權(quán)重時,統(tǒng)計學(xué)顯示組間有明顯差異。因此關(guān)于生存率的影響,目前發(fā)現(xiàn)尚不穩(wěn)定。另一方面,異質(zhì)性可能與人群年齡相關(guān),Wang等[14]患者的平均年齡在58歲而Wang等[15]納入的人群平均年齡在70歲左右。Wang等[15]在研究中亦發(fā)現(xiàn)對于<65歲的患者,術(shù)后疼痛是影響術(shù)后康復(fù)的關(guān)鍵因素,良好的術(shù)后疼痛控制可以使患者經(jīng)口進食早,下床活動早[16-19]。而本研究亦發(fā)現(xiàn)全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉可降低患者術(shù)后疼痛水平。這可能因硬膜外麻醉可實現(xiàn)硬膜外腔低濃度羅哌卡因輸注以及與持續(xù)泵注小劑量阿片類藥物有關(guān),其他研究亦證實此種方式可更有效緩解患者術(shù)后急性疼痛[20-21]。由于胃癌根治術(shù)手術(shù)時間較長,長時間的氣管插管加之胃癌患者自身免疫功能低下,術(shù)后肺部感染發(fā)生率較高,本研究中單純?nèi)砺樽斫M肺部感染發(fā)生率接近為21%,而全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉組肺部感染的發(fā)生率明顯降低為6%。這可能與硬膜外麻醉可減少麻醉藥物使用劑量,提供較好的術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛效果,有利于患者自主呼吸及氣道功能的恢復(fù),從而改善患者肺功能有關(guān)[9]。而硬膜外麻醉最主要的風險為術(shù)后尿潴留的發(fā)生[22-23]。本研究結(jié)果雖然顯示在硬膜外麻醉組,尿潴留的發(fā)生率較高,但由于樣本量小,確切結(jié)論仍有待未來研究證實。本研究優(yōu)勢在于嚴格按照Cochrane手冊進行系統(tǒng)評價,兩位研究者獨立篩查,評價和提取數(shù)據(jù),保證了數(shù)據(jù)的準確度。但是本文納入研究存在一定程度的混雜和檢測偏倚風險。兩組患者可能在一些潛在預(yù)后因素上存在基線不可比性,導(dǎo)致暴露因素與結(jié)局指標間存在混雜因素,此風險主要歸因于隨機在各研究中實施情況不佳。雖然納入的3篇隊列研究人群在基線時具有可比性,且經(jīng)過多因素分析調(diào)整,但觀察性研究對于平衡未知的混雜因素效果依然較差。此外,結(jié)局指標測量者是否采用盲法亦未可知。結(jié)局指標測量者沒有實施盲法可能對疼痛的指標影響較大,其他指標例如生存情況、副作用、住院時間受盲法影響較小。
綜上所述,全麻復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉可能改善胃癌根治術(shù)后患者生存率,降低術(shù)后疼痛程度和肺部感染率,縮短住院時間,但有可能增加尿潴留的發(fā)生風險。以上結(jié)論可能存在混雜偏倚和檢測偏倚,臨床使用時需謹慎。更加明確結(jié)論有待大樣本隨機對照試驗驗證。
[參考文獻]
[1]? Chen W,Zheng R,Baade PD,et al. Cancer statistics in China,2015 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin,2016,66(2):115-132.
[2]? Meng W,Bai B,Sheng L,et al. Role of Helicobacter Pylori in Gastric Cancer:Advances and Controversies [J]. Discov Med,2015,20(111):285-293.
[3]? Henriksen MG,Jensen MB,Hansen HV,et al. Enforced mobilization,early oral feeding,and balanced analgesia improve convalescence after colorectal surgery [J]. Nutrition,2002,18(2):147-152.
[4]? Zhou J,Zhou Y,Cao S,et al. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of postoperative complications and risk model establishment of gastrectomy for gastric cancer:A single-center cohort report [J]. Scand J Gastroenterol,2016, 51(1):8-15.
[5]? Cakmakkaya OS,Kolodzie K,Apfel CC,et al. Anaesthetic techniques for risk of malignant tumour recurrence [J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2014,7(11):CD 008 877.
[6]? Higgins JPT,Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [EB/OL]. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. [2011-03]
[7]? Moher D,Liberati A,Tetzlaff J,et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement [J]. BMJ. 2009,151(4):264-269.
[8]? 鐘惠,江英強,尹亞嵐,等.麻醉方式對胃癌患者術(shù)后呼吸道感染及T淋巴細胞和應(yīng)激水平的影響[J].中華醫(yī)院感染學(xué)雜志,2017,27(3):609-612.
[9]? 王澤華,胡文慶,郭焱,等.全身麻醉復(fù)合硬膜外麻醉對胃癌根治術(shù)患者肺功能及術(shù)后肺部感染的影響[J].中華醫(yī)院感染學(xué)雜志,2017,27(6):1301-1304.
[10]? Wang Y,Liu X,Li H. Incidence of the post-operative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients with general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia and patient-controlled epidural analgesia [J]. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban,2016,41(8):846-851.
[11]? Liu F,Zhang J,Zeng XQ,et al. Application of general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia/analgesia in rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection [J]. Zhonghua yi xue za zhi,2017,97(14):1089-1092.
[12]? Zhao J,Mo H. The Impact of Different Anesthesia Methods on Stress Reaction and Immune Function of the Patients with Gastric Cancer during Peri-Operative Period [J]. J Med Assoc Thai,2015,98(6):568-573.
[13]? Yanagimoto Y,Takiguchi S,Miyazaki Y,et al. Comparison of pain management after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with and without epidural analgesia [J]. Surg Today,2016,46(2):229-234.
[14]? Wang Y,Wang L,Chen H,et al. The effects of intra- and post-operative anaesthesia and analgesia choice on outcome after gastric cancer resection:a retrospective study [J]. Oncotarget,2017,8(37):62 658-62 665.
[15]? Wang J,Guo W,Wu Q,et al. Impact of Combination Epidural and General Anesthesia on the Long-Term Survival of Gastric Cancer Patients:A Retrospective Study [J]. Med Sci Monit,2016,22:2379-2385.
[16]? Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation [J]. Br J Anaesth,1997, 78(5):606-617.
[17]? Fearon KC,Ljungqvist O,Von MM,et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery:a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection [J]. Clin Nutr,2005, 24(3):466-477.
[18]? Kehlet H,Wilmore DW. Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome [J]. Am J Surg,2002,183(6):630-641.
[19]? Nimmo SM,F(xiàn)oo ITH,Paterson HM. Enhanced recovery after surgery:Pain management [J]. J Surg Oncol,2017, 116(5):583-591.
[20]? Zhu Z,Wang C,Xu C,et al. Influence of patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on postoperative pain control and recovery after gastrectomy for gastric cancer:a prospective randomized trial [J]. Gastric Cancer,2013,16(2):193-200.
[21]? Kun L,Tang L,Wang J,et al. Effect of Combined General/Epidural Anesthesia on Postoperative NK Cell Activity and Cytokine Response in Gastric Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Resection [J]. Hepatogastroenterology,2014,61(132):1142-1147.
[22]? Stubbs BM,Badcock KJ,Hyams C,et al. A prospective study of early removal of the urethral catheter after colorectal surgery in patients having epidural analgesia as part of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programme [J]. Colorectal Dis,2013,15(6):733-736.
[23]? Kim BS,Yook JH,Choi YB,et al. Comparison of Early Outcomes of Intracorporeal and Extracorporeal Gastroduodenostomy After Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer [J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A,2011, 21(5):387-391.
(收稿日期:2019-07-05? 本文編輯:劉明玉)