Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are among the most commonly administered drugs in the perioperative period due to their prominent role in pain management. However, they potentially have perioperative consequences due to immune-modulating effects through the inhibition of prostanoid synthesis, thereby affecting the levels of various cytokines. These effects may have a direct impact on the postoperative outcome of patients since the immune system aims to restore homeostasis and plays an indispensable role in regeneration and repair. By affecting the immune response, consequences can be expected on various organ systems. This narrative review aims to highlight these potential immune system–related consequences, which include systemic inflammatory response syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome, immediate and persistent postoperative pain, effects on oncological and neurologic outcome, and wound, anastomotic, and bone healing.

Ischemia reperfusion injury (IRI) is inevitable in kidney transplantation and negatively impacts graft and patient outcome. Reperfusion takes place in the recipient and most of the injury following ischemia and reperfusion occurs during this reperfusion phase; therefore, the intra-operative period seems an attractive window of opportunity to modulate IRI and improve short- and potentially long-term graft outcome. Commonly used volatile anesthetics such as sevoflurane and isoflurane have been shown to interfere with many of the pathophysiological processes involved in the injurious cascade of IRI. Therefore, volatile anesthetic (VA) agents might be the preferred anesthetics used during the transplantation procedure. This review highlights the molecular and cellular protective points of engagement of VA shown in in vitro studies and in vivo animal experiments, and the potential translation of these results to the clinical setting of kidney transplantation.

Background: Postoperative neurocognitive disorder (pNCD) is common after surgery. Exposure to anaesthetic drugs has been implicated as a potential cause of pNCD. Although several studies have investigated risk factors for the development of cognitive impairment in the early postoperative phase, risk factors for pNCD at 3 months have been less well studied. The aim of this study was to identify potential anaesthesia-related risk factors for pNCD at 3 months after surgery. Methods: We analysed data obtained for a prospective observational study in patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent surgery for excision of a solid tumour. Cognitive function was assessed preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively using 5 neuropsychological tests. Postoperative NCD was defined as a postoperative decline of ≥ 25% relative to baseline in ≥ 2 tests. The association between anaesthesia-related factors (type of anaesthesia, duration of anaesthesia, agents used for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia and analgesia, the use of additional vasoactive medication, depth of anaesthesia [bispectral index] and mean arterial pressure) and pNCD was analysed using logistic regression analyses. Furthermore, the relation between anaesthesia-related factors and change in cognitive test scores expressed as a continuous variable was analysed using a z-score. Results: Of the 196 included patients, 23 (12%) fulfilled the criteria for pNCD at 3 months postoperatively. A low preoperative score on Mini-Mental State Examination (OR, 8.9 [95% CI, (2.8–27.9)], p < 0.001) and a longer duration of anaesthesia (OR, 1.003 [95% CI, (1.001–1.005)], p = 0.013) were identified as risk factors for pNCD. On average, patients scored higher on postoperative tests (mean z-score 2.35[± 3.13]). Conclusion: In this cohort, duration of anaesthesia, which is probably an expression of the complexity of the surgery, was the only anaesthesia-related predictor of pNCD. On average, patients’ scores on cognitive tests improved postoperatively.