Time from colorectal cancer diagnosis to laparoscopic curative surgery-is there a safe window for prehabilitation?

Prehabilitation before general surgery: Worth the effort?

Prehabilitation, or interventions before surgery aimed at improving preoperative health and postoperative outcomes, has various forms. Although it may confer benefit to patients undergoing general surgery, this is not certain. Furthermore, although it may yield a net monetary gain, it is also likely to require substantial monetary and non-monetary investment. The impact of prehabilitation is highly variable and dependent on multiple factors. Physical function and pulmonary outcomes are likely to be improved by most forms of prehabilitation involving physical and multimodal exercise programmes. However, other surgical outcomes have demonstrated mixed results from prehabilitation. Within this issue, the measures used for evaluating baseline patient biopsychosocial health are important, and collecting sufficient data to accurately inform patient-centred prehabilitation programmes is only possible through thorough clinical and laboratory investigation and synthesised metrics such as cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Although a multimodal approach to prehabilitation is the current gold standard, societal factors may affect engagement with programmes that require a significant in-person activity. However, this is weighed against the substantial financial and non-financial investment that accompanies many programmes. The overall effectiveness and optimal mode of intervention across the discipline of general surgery remains unclear, and further research is needed to prove prehabilitation's full worth.

The effect of time before diagnosis and treatment on colorectal cancer outcomes: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate existing evidence on the relationship between diagnostic and treatment intervals and outcomes for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Four databases were searched for English language articles assessing the role of time before initial treatment in colorectal cancer on any outcome, including stage and survival. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and data were synthesised narratively. A dose-response meta-analysis was performed to examine the association between treatment interval and survival.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty papers were included in the systematic review, eight were included in the meta-analysis. Forty-five different intervals were considered in the time from first symptom to treatment. The most common finding was of no association between the length of intervals on any outcome. The dose-response meta-analysis showed a U-shaped association between the treatment interval and overall survival with the nadir at 45 days.

CONCLUSION

The review found inconsistent, but mostly a lack of, association between interval length and colorectal cancer outcomes, but study design and quality were heterogeneous. Meta-analysis suggests survival becomes increasingly poorer for those commencing treatment more than 45 days after diagnosis.

REGISTRATION

This review was registered, and the protocol is available, in PROSPERO, the international database of systematic reviews, with the registration ID CRD42021255864.

Recommendations on the use of prehabilitation, i.e. comprehensive preparation of the patient for surgery

Prehabilitation is a comprehensive preparation of a patient for primarily surgical treatments. Its aim is to improve the patient'sgeneral condition so as to reduce the risk of complications and ensure the fastest possible recovery to full health. Thebasic components of prehabilitation include: improvement of nutritional status, appropriate exercises to improve functioning,psychological support, and help in eliminating addictions. Other important aspects of prehabilitation are: increasinghemoglobin levels in patients with anemia, achieving good glycemic control in patients with diabetes, treatment or stabilizationof any concurrent disorders, or specialist treatment associated with a specific procedure (endoprostheses, ostomyprocedure). This article organizes and outlines the indications for prehabilitation, its scope, duration, and the method to conductit. Experts of various specialties related to prehabilitation agree that it should be an element of surgery preparationwhenever possible, especially in patients with co-existing medical conditions who have been qualified for major procedures.Prehabilitation should be carried out by interdisciplinary teams, including family physicians and various specialists in thetreatment of comorbidities. Prehabilitation requires urgent systemic and reimbursement solutions.

A systematic review of methodological considerations in time to diagnosis and treatment in colorectal cancer research

Research focusing on timely diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer is necessary to improve outcomes for people with cancer. Previous attempts to consolidate research on time to diagnosis and treatment have noted varied methodological approaches and quality, limiting the comparability of findings. This systematic review was conducted to comprehensively assess the scope of methodological issues in this field and provide recommendations for future research. Eligible articles had to assess the role of any interval up to treatment, on any outcome in colorectal cancer, in English, with no limits on publication time. Four databases were searched (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE and PsycInfo). Papers were screened by two independent reviewers using a two-stage process of title and abstract followed by full text review. In total, 130 papers were included and had data extracted on specific methodological and statistical features. Several methodological problems were identified across the evidence base. Common issues included arbitrary categorisation of intervals (n = 107, 83%), no adjustment for potential confounders (n = 65, 50%), and lack of justification for included covariates where there was adjustment (n = 40 of 65 papers that performed an adjusted analysis, 62%). Many articles introduced epidemiological biases such as immortal time bias (n = 37 of 80 papers that used survival as an outcome, 46%) and confounding by indication (n = 73, 56%), as well as other biases arising from inclusion of factors outside of their temporal sequence. However, determination of the full extent of these problems was hampered by insufficient reporting. Recommendations include avoiding artificial categorisation of intervals, ensuring bias has not been introduced due to out-of-sequence use of key events and increased use of theoretical frameworks to detect and reduce bias. The development of reporting guidelines and domain-specific risk of bias tools may aid in ensuring future research can reliably contribute to recommendations regarding optimal timing and strengthen the evidence base.

Expression Levels of GHRH-Receptor, pAkt and Hsp90 Predict 10-Year Overall Survival in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Background: Rectal cancer constitutes nearly one-third of all colorectal cancer diagnoses, and certain clinical and molecular markers have been studied as potential prognosticators of patient survival. The main objective of our study was to investigate the relationship between the expression intensities of certain proteins, including growth-hormone-releasing hormone receptor (GHRH-R), Hsp90, Hsp16.2, p-Akt and SOUL, in specimens of locally advanced rectal cancer patients, as well as the time to metastasis and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates. We also investigated whether these outcome measures were associated with the presence of other clinical parameters. Methods: In total, 109 patients were investigated retrospectively. Samples of pretreatment tumors were stained for the proteins GHRH-R, Hsp90, Hsp16.2, p-Akt and SOUL using immunhistochemistry methods. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to show the relationships between the intensity of expression of biomarkers, clinical parameters, the time to metastasis and the 10-year OS rate. Results: High levels of p-Akt, GHRH-R and Hsp90 were associated with a significantly decreased 10-year OS rate (p = 0.001, p = 0.000, p = 0.004, respectively) and high expression levels of p-Akt and GHRH-R were correlated with a significantly shorter time to metastasis. Tumors localized in the lower third of the rectum were linked to both a significantly longer time to metastasis and an improved 10-year OS rate. Conclusions: Hsp 90, pAkt and GHRH-R as well as the lower-third localization of the tumor were predictive of the 10-year OS rate in locally advanced rectal cancer patients. The GHRH-R and Hsp90 expression levels were independent prognosticators of OS. Our results imply that GHRH-R could play a particularly important role both as a molecular biomarker and as a target for the anticancer treatment of advanced rectal cancer.

Effects and duration of exercise-based prehabilitation in surgical therapy of colon and rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Functional capacity is an independent indicator of morbidity in colon and rectal cancer surgery. This systematic review describes the evaluated and synthesized effects of exercise prehabilitation depending on the duration of interventions on functional and postoperative outcomes in colon and rectal cancer surgery.

Methods

Three electronic databases (MEDLINE Pubmed, Web of Sciences, and Cochrane Registry) were systematically searched (January 2022) for controlled trials that investigated the effects of prehabilitation prior to colo-rectal cancer resection.

Results

Twenty-three studies were included in this systematic review and 14 in our meta-analyses assessing these outcomes: the 6 min walk distance (6MWD), postoperative overall complications, and length of stay (LOS). We observed a significant improvement in preoperative functional capacity as measured with 6MWD (mean difference: 30.8 m; 95% CI 13.3, 48.3; p = 0.0005) due to prehabilitation. No reductions in LOS (mean difference: – 0.27 days; 95% CI – 0.93, 0.40; p = 0.5) or postoperative overall complications (Odds ratio: 0.84; 95% CI 0.53, 1.31; p = 0.44) were observed. Prehabilitation lasting more than 3 weeks tended to lower overall complications (Odds ratio: 0.66; 95% CI 0.4, 1.1; p = 0.11). However, the prehabilitation time periods differed between colon and rectal carcinoma resections.

Conclusion

Prehabilitation while the patient is preparing to undergo surgery for colorectal carcinoma improves functional capacity; and might reduce postoperative overall complications, but does not shorten the LOS. The studies we reviewed differ in target variables, design, and the intervention’s time period. Multicenter studies with sufficient statistical power and differentiating between colon and rectal carcinoma are needed to develop implementation strategies in the health care system.

Registration

PROSPERO CRD42022310532

Robotic and laparoscopic surgical procedures for colorectal cancer

The study aims to investigate perioperative indices and immediate outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgical interventions in colorectal cancer patients. The study included 163 patients [90 (55.2%) females and 73 (44.8%) males, aged 67.46 ± 6.72 years, on average] who had surgery for morphologically checked colorectal cancer. Of those, 101 patients had laparoscopic surgery (Group 1), and 62 patients had robot-assisted surgery (Group 2). The study found that the safety profile of both robot and laparoscopic procedures for colorectal cancer is comparable. The total complication rate in the laparoscopic group was 6.9% (in 7 patients), in the robot-assisted group-11.3% (in 7 patients) (χ² = 0.93, p = 0.34). Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer is a promising direction for improving patients' level and quality of care with this oncological pathology.

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery.

METHODS

This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin.

RESULTS

Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes.

CONCLUSION

One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease.

Effects of Perioperative Oral Nutrition Supplementation in Malaysian Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery for Breast and Colorectal Cancers-A Randomised Controlled Trial

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of preoperative and an extended 90-days postoperative use of ONS among patients undergoing elective surgery for breast and colorectal cancers. Ninety-one patients were randomised into (i) Group SS received ONS up to 14 days preoperatively and postoperatively up to discharge, (ii) Group SS-E received ONS up to 14 days preoperatively, postoperatively up to discharge and for an extended 90-days after discharge and (iii) Group DS received ONS postoperatively up to discharge. Preoperatively, SS had significantly higher body weight (66.1 ± 15.3 kg vs. 62.5 ± 12.0 kg, p = 0.010) and BMI (26.8 ± 6.8 kg/m2 vs. 26.1 ± 6.7 kg/m2, p = 0.022) than DS when adjusted for baseline values. Postoperatively, SS-E had significantly higher handgrip strength (26 ± 9 kgF vs. 24 ± 6 kgF, p = 0.044) than DS at 90-days post-discharge after adjusted for preoperative values. At 90-days post-discharge, the proportions of patients in SS with albumin < 35 g/d, CAR ≥ 0.1, mPINI ≥ 0.4, mGPS score 1 or 2 were significantly reduced while in SS-E, the reduction in proportions of patients with high hsCRP and mPINI ≥ 0.4 was significant compared to upon discharge. Preoperative ONS had modest benefits in attenuating weight loss whilst postoperative supplementation up to 90-days post-discharge improved handgrip strength and inflammatory prognostic markers.

What matters to you? An investigation of patients' perspectives on and acceptability of prehabilitation in major cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

To understand perspectives on and acceptability of prehabilitation among patients undergoing complex abdominal cancer surgery (cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy).

METHODS

Seventy-nine patients admitted to a Danish colorectal or ovarian cancer centre participated in qualitative semi-structured interviews and/or registered their prehabilitation activities based on preoperative recommendations presented in a leaflet. Malterud's principles of systematic text condensation were used to analyse the interview data, and descriptive statistics were used to describe the activity registrations.

RESULTS

Five domains clarify central aspects of the patients' perspectives on and acceptability of prehabilitation: the preoperative period, attitudes towards prehabilitation, the actual prehabilitation performed, motivation to take action and the need for support.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery are interested in and positive towards prehabilitation, but it has to be on their terms. The patients need support and supervision, but it has to be provided in a setting and in a way that are in line with the patient's preferences, resources and values. Thus, patient involvement is necessary to create prehabilitation programmes that are feasible and fit into patients' everyday lives.

A multimodal prehabilitation program in high-risk patients undergoing elective resection for colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study

AIM

Up to 50% of the patients experience complications after colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Improved preoperative physical and nutritional status can enhance clinical outcomes and reduce postoperative complications. This retrospective, single-center, observational cohort study assessed the impact of a four-week multimodal prehabilitation program on postoperative complications, unplanned readmissions, length of stay, and mortality in elective high-risk CRC patients.

METHOD

Elective high-risk CRC patients, defined as ASA ≥3 or ≥65yr, who attended the multimodal prehabilitation program (prehabilitation-group) were compared to a historical cohort receiving standard care (control-group). Differences in outcomes between these groups were tested using Fisher's Exact and Mann-Whitney U test. To adjust for confounding, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. The main study outcome was the occurrence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included unplanned readmissions, length of hospital stay, and mortality.

RESULTS

351 patients were included (n = 275 control-group, n = 76 prehabilitation-group). The complication rate was lower in the prehabilitation group compared to the control group, 26.3% (n = 20) versus 40% (n = 110) (p = .032). There were fewer unplanned readmissions in the prehabilitation group compared to the control group, 5.3% (n = 4) versus 16.4% (n = 45), p = .014. Median hospital days of stay was 1 day shorter for the prehabilitation-group (p = .004), mortality did not significantly differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the used multimodal prehabilitation program leads to a reduction of medical postoperative complications, unplanned readmissions, and shortens the median hospital stay compared with standard care in high-risk CRC patients undergoing elective CRC surgery.

Preoperative physical exercise strategies for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Although preoperative physical exercise has been demonstrated to be associated with clinical improvements among abdominal cancer patients, there remains heterogeneity in exercise strategies and uncertainty of what the optimal strategies should be.

PURPOSE

This scoping review aimed to review and summarize the existing knowledge about preoperative exercise strategies for abdominal cancer patients.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework for conducting scoping reviews was adopted to investigate preoperative physical exercise strategies for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 1563 studies were identified and 24 were included in this review. Most of the study populations were colorectal cancer (n = 14). The most common type of exercise was a combination of aerobic and resistance exercises (n = 19). The most common form of aerobic exercise was walking (n = 13) or cycling (n = 12). Most resistance exercises were targeting at major muscle groups (n = 12). Most of the studies were performed at moderate intensity (n = 14) with frequency of 2 ~ 3 times/week (n = 14). The time of a training session was 30 ~ 60 min in half studies (n = 12). The intervention duration for most studies was less than 4 weeks (n = 11). Exercise locations included home (n = 10), facility (n = 7), and a combination of home and facility (n = 5). Phone calls were utilized by nearly half of the home-based exercise studies to supervise the exercise adherence (n = 7).

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a comprehensive summary of preoperative physical exercise strategies. It has the potential to inform clinical practice and future studies.

Prehabilitation for Frail Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: Lessons Learnt From a Randomised Feasibility Study

There is substantial interest by clinicians to improve the health outcomes of older and frail patients following major surgery, with prehabilitation a potential and important component of future standard patient care. We studied the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of pre-operative prehabilitation in frail patients scheduled for colorectal surgery in regional Australia. We conducted a single blind, parallel arm, randomised controlled trial in a regional referral centre where colorectal surgical patients aged over 50 were invited to participate and screened for frailty. Frail patients were randomised to undertake either a 4-week supervised exercise program with dietary advice, or usual care. The primary outcome was 6-min-walk-distance at baseline, pre-surgery (4 weeks later) and at follow-up (4–6 weeks post-operation). Secondary outcomes included physical activity level, health-related quality of life, and post-surgical complications. Feasibility outcomes were numbers of patients reaching each stage and barriers or reasons for withdrawal. Of 106 patients eligible for screening during the 2-year study period, only five were able to be randomised, of which one alone completed the entire study to follow-up. Fewer patients than expected met the frailty criteria (23.6%), and many (22.6%) were offered surgery in a shorter timeframe than the required 4 weeks. Physical and psychological aspects of frailty and logistical issues were key for patients declining study participation and/or not complying with the intervention and/or all outcome assessments. Feasibility for a large randomised controlled trial of prehabilitation for frail colorectal patients was poor (~5%) for our regional location. Addressing barriers, examination of a large, dense population base, and utilisation of a frailty-screening tool validated in surgical patients are necessary for future studies to identify the impact of prehabilitation for frail patients.

Could diagnostic and therapeutic delay affect the prognosis of gastrointestinal primary malignancies in the COVID-19 pandemic era? A literature review

BACKGROUND

Emergency situations, as the Covid-19 pandemic that is striking the world nowadays, stress the national health systems which are forced to rapidly reorganizing their sources. Therefore, many elective diagnostic and surgical procedures are being suspended or significantly delayed. Moreover, patients might find it difficult to refer to physicians and delay the diagnostic and even the therapeutic procedures because of emotional or logistic problems. The effect of diagnostic and therapeutic delay on survival in patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies is still unclear.

METHODS

We carried out a review of the available literature, in order to determine whether the delay in performing diagnosis and curative-intent surgical procedures affects the oncological outcomes in patients with oesophageal, gastric, colorectal cancers, and colorectal liver metastasis.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that for oesophageal, gastric and colon cancers delaying surgery up to 2 months after the end of the staging process does not worsen the oncological outcomes. Oesophageal cancer should undergo surgery within 7-8 weeks after the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Rectal cancers should undergo surgery within 31 days after the diagnostic process and within 12 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy should start within 4 weeks after surgery, especially in gastric cancer; a delay up to 42 days may be allowed for oesophageal cancer undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal malignancies can be safely managed taking into account that reasonable delays of planned treatments appear a generally safe approach, not having a significant impact on long-term oncological outcome.

Conflicting Guidelines: A Systematic Review on the Proper Interval for Colorectal Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

Timely treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a quality indicator in oncological care. However, patients with CRC might benefit more from preoperative optimization rather than rapid treatment initiation. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the definition of the CRC treatment interval, (2) to study international recommendations regarding this interval and (3) to study whether length of the interval is associated with outcome.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the literature in June 2020 through MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, complemented with a web search and a survey among colorectal surgeons worldwide. Full-text papers including subjects with CRC and a description of the treatment interval were included.

RESULTS

Definition of the treatment interval varies widely in published studies, especially due to different starting points of the interval. Date of diagnosis is often used as start of the interval, determined with date of pathological confirmation. The end of the interval is rather consistently determined with date of initiation of any primary treatment. Recommendations on the timeline of the treatment interval range between and within countries from two weeks between decision to treat and surgery, to treatment within seven weeks after pathological diagnosis. Finally, there is no decisive evidence that a longer treatment interval is associated with worse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The interval from diagnosis to treatment for CRC treatment could be used for prehabilitation to benefit patient recovery. It may be that this strategy is more beneficial than urgently proceeding with treatment.

Considerations in Surgical Management of Gastrointestinal Cancer in Older Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this manuscript is to present new and thought-provoking information related to the surgical care of older patients. We focused on four main areas including communication, surgical pathways, the care of emergency surgery patients, and functional recovery and quality of life. We sought to answer how these areas have evolved, affecting the care of older patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Older patients with cancer present particular challenges in relation to communication, goals, surgical treatment, and post-surgical outcomes. Communication should be clear early and during the treatment course. A multidisciplinary, multimodality, multi-phase pathway can be utilized to improve the postoperative outcomes of older patients with cancer. Functional recovery and quality of life can and should be measured in this population. Communication is complicated in cancer patients, which is made more complex with advancing age. Communication is the cornerstone of the treatment of older patients. Future research should focus on interventions to improve communication and measure quality of life and functional recovery metrics.

Prehabilitative Exercise for the Enhancement of Physical, Psychosocial, and Biological Outcomes Among Patients Diagnosed with Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes the effects of prehabilitative exercise interventions on the physical, psychosocial, and biological outcomes among patients with cancer. Current gaps and future directions in prehabilitative exercise research will be addressed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Prehabilitative exercise mitigates the detrimental impact of cancer surgery on physical fitness, noted by increases in maximal oxygen consumption and 6-min walk distance. Beneficial effects on psychosocial and biological outcomes remain inconclusive. Aerobic exercise interventions were often prescribed and included low-, moderate-, or high-intensity exercise. Resistance exercise interventions were often performed in conjunction with aerobic exercise. Prehabilitative exercise elicits robust improvements in physical fitness; however, effect on psychosocial and biological outcomes remains inconclusive. Exercise prescription parameters varied greatly by frequency, intensity, time, and type across multiple cancer diagnoses. Future investigations are needed to systematically dose exercise for a wider variety of outcome measures, with an overall goal to set forth pre-operative exercise guidelines.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Physical Exercise Prehabilitation in Major Abdominal Surgery (PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017080366)

BACKGROUND

Physical exercise prehabilitation has been proposed to improve postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effect of preoperative exercise training compared with standard care on postoperative outcomes in major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing prehabilitation with standard care were identified by a systematic literature search of MEDLINE and CENTRAL. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of perioperative outcome data were conducted. Meta-analyses were performed wherever possible and meaningful.

RESULTS

A total of eight trials including 442 patients met the inclusion criteria. These trials investigated the effect of prehabilitation in patient cohorts undergoing major liver, colorectal, gastroesophageal, and general abdominal surgery. Quantitative analyses of all included trials showed a significant reduction in postoperative pulmonary complications (OR 0.37; 0.20 to 0.67; p = 0.001) as well as in postoperative overall morbidity (OR 0.52; 0.30 to 0.88; p = 0.01) in the prehabilitation group compared with standard care. The length of hospital stay showed no significant differences between the groups (MD - 0.58; - 1.28 to 0.13; p = 0.11). Risk of bias and methodological quality varied substantially among the trials, most of which were small single-center studies.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation including a physical exercise intervention may lead to a reduction of postoperative pulmonary complications as well as less overall morbidity compared with standard care in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Further, well-designed RCT are needed to evaluate these potential positive effects in more detail and to identify suitable target populations.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017080366.

The Role and Scope of Prehabilitation in Cancer Care

OBJECTIVES

To recognize cancer prehabilitation as a pretreatment regimen to increase functional status for patients requiring cancer treatment. This article presents current evidence addressing the efficacy and benefits of prehabilitation regimens in different cancer survivor populations.

DATA SOURCES

Studies and case reports in the PubMed database.

CONCLUSION

Cancer prehabilitation may improve outcomes. Prehabilitation may include targeted or whole-body exercise, nutrition, education, psychologic counseling, and smoking cessation. Opportunities exist to further improve access to and delivery of multimodal prehabilitation, and nurses play a critical role in connecting patients to these services.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Oncology nurses who are knowledgeable of cancer treatment-related effects are poised to assess survivors for existing impairments, advocate for prehabilitation for existing and potential morbidities, and monitor functional status over time. As patient educators, they are key to informing cancer survivors about the role of prehabilitation.

Gastrointestinal Malignancies and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence-Based Triage to Surgery

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread cancelation of electively scheduled surgeries, including for colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer. The American College of Surgeons and the Society of Surgical Oncology have released guidelines for triage of these procedures. We seek to synthesize available evidence on delayed resection and oncologic outcomes, while also providing a critical assessment of the released guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify literature between 2005 and 2020 investigating the impact of time to surgery on oncologic outcomes in colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer.

RESULTS

For colorectal cancer, 1066 abstracts were screened and 43 papers were included. In primarily resected colon cancer, delay over 30 to 40 days is associated with lower survival. In rectal cancer, time to surgery over 7 to 8 weeks following neoadjuvant therapy is associated with decreased survival. Three hundred ninety-four abstracts were screened for pancreatic cancer and nine studies were included. Two studies demonstrate increased unexpected progression with delayed surgery over 30 days. Out of 633 abstracts screened for gastric cancer, six studies were included. No identified study demonstrated worse survival with increased time to surgery.

CONCLUSION

Moderate evidence suggests that delayed resection of colorectal cancer worsens survival; the impact of time to surgery on gastric and pancreatic cancer outcomes is uncertain. Early resection of gastrointestinal malignancies provides the best chance for curative therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritization of procedures should account for available evidence on time to surgery and oncologic outcomes.

The Impact of Delays to Definitive Surgical Care on Survival in Colorectal Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

Treatment delay may have detrimental effects on cancer outcomes. The impact of longer delays on colorectal cancer outcomes remains poorly described. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of delays to curative-intent surgical resection on survival in colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

All adult patients undergoing elective resection of primary non-metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma from January 2009 to December 2014 were reviewed. Treatment delays were defined as the time from tissue diagnosis to definitive surgery, categorized as < 4, 4 to < 8, and ≥ 8 weeks. Primary outcomes were 5-year disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Statistical analysis included Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 408 patients were included (83.2% colon;15.8% rectal) with a mean follow-up of 58.4 months (SD29.9). Fourteen percent (14.0%) of patients underwent resection < 4 weeks, 40.0% 4 to < 8 weeks, and 46.1% ≥ 8 weeks. More rectal cancer patients had treatment delay ≥ 8 weeks compared with colonic tumors (69.8% vs. 41.4%, p < 0.001). Cumulative 5-year DFS and OS were similar between groups (p = 0.558; p = 0.572). After adjusting for confounders, surgical delays were not independently associated with DFS and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment delays > 4 weeks were not associated with worse oncologic outcomes. Delaying surgery to optimize patients can safely be considered without compromising survival.

Artificial Neural Network Individualised Prediction of Time to Colorectal Cancer Surgery

Aim

Colorectal cancer pathway targets mandate prompt treatment although practicalities may mean patients wait for surgery. This variable period could be utilised for patient optimisation; however, there is currently no reliable predictive system for time to surgery. If individualised surgical waits were prospectively known, tailored prehabilitation could be introduced.

Methods

A dedicated, prospectively populated elective laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer with a curative intent database was utilised. Primary endpoint was the prediction of the individualised waiting time for surgery. A multilayered perceptron artificial neural network (ANN) model was trained and tested alongside uni- and multivariate analyses.

Results

668 consecutive patients were included. 8.5% underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The mean time from diagnosis to surgery was 53 days (95% CI 48.3-57.8). ANN correctly identified those having surgery in <8 (97.7% and 98.8%) and <12 weeks (97.1% and 98.8%) of the training and testing cohorts with area under the receiver operating curves of 0.793 and 0.865, respectively. After neoadjuvant treatment, an ASA physical status score was the most important potentially modifiable risk factor for prolonged waits (normalised importance 64%, OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.5-16). The ANN findings were accurately cross-validated with a logistic regression model.

Conclusion

Artificial neural networks using demographic and diagnostic data successfully predict individual time to colorectal cancer surgery. This could assist the personalisation of preoperative care including the incorporation of prehabilitation interventions.

Feasibility of preoperative supervised home-based exercise in older adults undergoing colorectal cancer surgery - A randomized controlled design

Preoperative physical exercise is emerging as a growing field of research globally. There are still challenges in recruiting vulnerable older people, and time constraints in preoperative cancer care to consider. We therefore evaluated the feasibility of short-term supervised home-based exercise in older people prior to colorectal cancer surgery. This feasibility study was conducted between September 2016 and June 2018. People ≥70 years scheduled for colorectal cancer surgery were recruited and randomized to an intervention group receiving supervised home-based physical exercise at a high level of estimated exertion or a standard care group following the standard preoperative path. The exercise (respiratory, strength, and aerobic) consisted of 2–3 supervised sessions a week in the participants’ homes, for at least 2–3 weeks or until surgery, and a self-administered exercise program in between. The primary outcome was process feasibility, including aspects specifically related to recruitment rate, compliance to the intervention, and acceptability. The secondary outcome was scientific feasibility including treatment safety, description of dose level and response, and estimation of treatment results. Twenty-three participants were included (recruitment rate 35%). A median of 6 supervised sessions was conducted over a 17-day exercise period. Compliance with the supervised sessions was 97%, and participants found the intervention acceptable. Concerning the self-administered exercise, a median of 19 inspiratory muscle training, 6 functional strength, and 8.5 aerobic sessions were reported. Challenges reported by program instructors were time constraints and difficulties in achieving high exercise intensities on the Borg CR-10 scale. A statistically significant between-group difference was only found in inspiratory muscle strength, favoring the intervention group (p<0.01). A short-term preoperative supervised home-based physical exercise intervention can be conducted, with respect to compliance and acceptability, in older people with similar physical status as in this study prior to colorectal cancer surgery. However, modifications are warranted with respect to improving recruitment rates and achieving planned intensity levels prior to conducting a definitive trial.

Multimodal prehabilitation to reduce the incidence of delirium and other adverse events in elderly patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery: An uncontrolled before-and-after study

Background

Delirium is a common and serious complication in elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, with significant adverse outcomes. Successful strategies or therapies to reduce the incidence of delirium are scarce. The objective of this study was to assess the role of prehabilitation in reducing the incidence of delirium in elderly patients.

Methods

A single-center uncontrolled before-and-after study was conducted, including patients aged 70 years or older who underwent elective abdominal surgery for colorectal carcinoma or an abdominal aortic aneurysm between January 2013 and October 2015 (control group) and between November 2015 and June 2018 (prehabilitation group). The prehabilitation group received interventions to improve patients’ physical health, nutritional status, factors of frailty and preoperative anaemia prior to surgery. The primary outcome was incidence of delirium, diagnosed with the DSM-V criteria or the confusion assessment method. Secondary outcomes were additional complications, length of stay, unplanned ICU admission, length of ICU stay, readmission rate, institutionalization, and in-hospital or 30-day mortality.

Result

A total of 360 control patients and 267 prehabilitation patients were included in the final analysis. The mean number of prehabilitation days was 39 days. The prehabilitation group had a higher burden of comorbidities and was more physically and visually impaired at baseline. At adjusted logistic regression analysis, delirium incidence was reduced significantly from 11.7 to 8.2% (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.32–0.98; P = 0.043). No statistically significant effects were seen on secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

Current prehabilitation program is feasible and safe, and can reduce delirium incidence in elderly patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery. This program merits further evaluation.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Registration, NTR5932.