A recent meta-analysis has suggested that epidural anaesthesia may have a beneficial effect on the overall survival after cancer surgery, particularly in patients with colorectal cancer. However, the use of epidural analgesia did not further reduce the numbers of recurrent cancers. The meta-analysis suggests that epidural anaesthesia and/or analgesia may be associated with improved overall survival in patients with operable cancer (especially colorectal cancer) who undergo surgery.7
The results of the present study show that administration of thoracic epidural analgesia for perioperative analgesia during and after colon cancer resection was associated with a reduced 36-month mortality rate. These results support the findings of the earlier meta-analysis.7 Patients over the age of 70 at the time of surgery benefit more from epidural analgesia and survive significantly longer than patients in whom only a balanced anaesthetic technique is used. However, no reduction in the incidence of recurrent cancer was noted after adjustment for confounding variables.
Colon cancer is a systemic disease. Despite curative tumour resection, it is important to note that as many as 25–40% of patients who undergo curative tumour resection nevertheless subsequently develop metastatic disease, suggesting that there may be undetected micrometastases that play a pivotal role in relapses. One of the major causes of relapse is the presence of disseminated tumour cells shed from the primary carcinoma into the circulation before, during, or after surgery.8 Due to profound perioperative immunosuppression, the perioperative period appears to be a vulnerable time for potential metastasis in patients with malignancies. This vulnerability is mainly attributed to the suppression of cell-mediated immunity – the first-line defence mechanism against cancer. The depression of the immune system occurs within hours of surgery, lasts for several days, and is proportional to the extent of surgical trauma.4 With colorectal surgery, the perioperative and postoperative period is characterized by surgical stress and pharmacological influences, which affect cell-mediated immunity during this vulnerable phase for tumour cell dissemination. In particular, natural killer cells and cytotoxic T cells are suppressed by high levels of stress biomarkers such as epinephrine and norepinephrine.9,10 Thoracic epidural analgesia blunts the neural transmission of the stress response and avoids negative effects of hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal activation such as immune suppression.4 In addition, thoracic epidural analgesia reduces the amount of anaesthetics and analgesics required. These facts appear to be important, as some of these types of drug can promote immune suppression.4 Using carefully considered anaesthetic techniques might therefore be able to reduce the inhibition of hormonal and cellular immune function and may even reduce the pro-angiogenic effect on tumour growth, resulting in fewer tumour recurrences in these oncological patients.4
Accumulated evidence indicates that inflammation may play a critical role in the initiation, development, growth, and metastasis of cancer.11 Regional anaesthesia may therefore have a potential anti-inflammatory effect, attenuating an excessive immune reaction induced by surgical trauma, and it appears to have a beneficial effect on the outcome for the patients.5 Bupivacaine inhibits prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) E-prostanoid 1 (EP1) receptor signalling at clinically relevant concentrations and affects physiological responses such as fever, inflammation, and hyperalgesia during the perioperative period.12 Local anaesthetics have a time-dependent inhibitory effect on G protein-coupled receptor signalling.13 They are known to be effective in suppressing neutrophil priming, a process that is responsible in part for the hyperactive neutrophil response.14 Local anaesthetics can even inhibit thromboxane A2 signalling, a mediator of perioperative myocardial ischaemia, vasoconstriction, and thrombosis.15,16 They also inhibit the activation of human N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors. This effect reduces the hyperalgesia and opiate tolerance that is observed after systemic administration of local anaesthetics.17 Results published by Piegeler et al. indicate that amide local anaesthetics may have antimetastatic effects. The mechanism behind this interesting pharmacological finding is inhibition of tumour necrosis factor-–induced Src activation and intracellular adhesion molecule-1 phosphorylation.18 This molecular mechanism with amide-type local anaesthetics is again independent of the sodium channel blockade. It would be of major interest to determine whether some of the effects of epidural analgesia may be due to the systemic effects of local anaesthetics.
Despite these promising results from basic science and theoretical models, however, the results of the present study do not support the view that perioperative administration of thoracic epidural analgesia leads to less recurrent cancer. This may be due to the familiar problems of retrospective analysis, such as unrecorded confounding factors and changes in the patients’ medical care. This potential deficiency was reduced in the present study, as the surgeon and oncologist were the same throughout the recorded study period. However, it is not known how often the patients may have required additional surgery for other medical conditions, with the same level of surgical stress and the same immunosuppressive effects. Nor is it known whether the patients were receiving medication with statins, beta-blockers, or cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors perioperatively, which also appear to have antimetastatic properties.4 Along with the rapid advances being made in oncological treatment, it will therefore be very difficult to prove whether a specific anaesthetic technique is really able to reduce the risk of recurrent cancer.
However, thoracic epidural analgesia is an important component of fast-track rehabilitation in colon surgery. In addition to faster recovery, some authors have also described a reduction in general morbidity,19,20 with fewer cardiovascular adverse events due to epidural anaesthesia and perioperative stress protection, analgesia, and sympathicolysis. The incidence of thrombosis and embolism is reduced. Epidural analgesia reduces the use of systemic opioids, and in combination with splanchnic sympathicolysis, prevents intestinal hypomotility and accelerates convalescence and a return to oral nutrition for the patients. It has also been reported that pain-induced pulmonary atelectasis and pneumonia can be prevented.3,21 In a population-based study, Cummings et al.22 compared epidural analgesia and traditional forms of pain management in relation to their effects on survival and recurrent cancer after colectomy. In this large observational study, including 42,151 patients, the 5-year survival rate was 61% in the epidural group and 55% in the non-epidural group.22 The difference was analysed using adjusted Cox regression and strongly supports the data obtained in the present study.
This study has certain limitations, the most important of which is that it is a small, single-centre retrospective study. For conclusive findings on whether regional anaesthesia is capable of reducing the risk of tumour relapse, a large, multicentre study with a prospective and randomized design would be needed. In a trial of that type, patients would need to be included within a very short study period in order to reduce the possibility of changes in oncological regimens that would make it difficult to compare the study groups. Prospective trials are currently in progress, but no data from them have so far been published. The present study excludes the possibility of variations resulting from different surgeons and oncologists participating, and it may therefore be of special interest.