Prior Sternotomy and Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Do Not Adversely Impact Survival or Allograft Function After Heart Transplantation

Application of donor predicted heart mass in heart transplant recipients with left ventricular assist device

Background

An association between predicted heart mass (PHM) and post heart transplantation outcomes has been well established; however, there is limited data on the effect of donor PHM on recipients bridged with a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD). This retrospective observational study seeks to challenge the theoretical benefit of oversizing donor hearts for recipients bridged with LVADs.

Methods

Analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database revealed 10,806 adult patients with 1 of 3 durable LVADs (HeartMate 2, HeartMate 3 [HM3], HeartWare Ventricular Assist Device) between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Baseline characteristics were compared between 7 equally sized groups based on donor-to-recipient PHM. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were constructed to evaluate the effect of PHM size-matching on the primary outcome of 1-year post-transplant survival. Further analyses were performed specifically on HM3 patients and with PHM as a continuous variable.

Results

Multivariable analysis revealed that severely undersized donor hearts (PHM ratio <0.86) resulted in worse outcomes with respect to 1-year mortality (hazard ratio 1.30; confidence interval 1.03-1.64, p = 0.03). There was no significant benefit to oversizing donor hearts. Similar results were found in patients bridged to transplant with HM3.

Conclusions

Similar to prior studies on heart transplant recipients, recipients bridged with durable LVAD had worse outcomes when using severely undersized donor hearts. Oversized donor hearts did not significantly improve 1-year mortality, compared to size-matched references. These results were consistent in a subgroup analysis of patients bridged only with HM3 LVADs.

Days Alive and Out of the Hospital After Heart Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate days alive and out of the hospital (DAOH) as an outcome measure after orthotopic heart transplantation in patients with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as a bridge to transplant compared to those patients without prior MCS.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study of adult patients who underwent cardiac transplantation between January 1, 2015, and January 1, 2020. The primary outcome was DAOH at 365 days (DAOH365) after an orthotopic heart transplant. A Poisson regression model was fitted to detect the association between independent variables and DAOH365.

SETTING

An academic tertiary referral center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 235 heart transplant patients were included-103 MCS as a bridge to transplant patients, and 132 direct orthotopic heart transplants without prior MCS.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The median DAOH365 for the entire cohort was 348 days (IQR 335.0-354.0). There was no difference in DAOH365 between the MCS patients and patients without MCS (347.0 days [IQR 336.0-353.0] v 348.0 days [IQR 334.0-354.0], p = 0.43). Multivariate analysis identified patients who underwent a transplant after the 2018 heart transplant allocation change, pretransplant pulmonary hypertension, and increased total ischemic time as predictors of reduced DAOH365.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of patients undergoing orthotopic heart transplantation, there was no significant difference in DAOH365 in patients with prior MCS as a bridge to transplant compared to those without MCS. Incorporating days alive and out of the hospital into the pre-transplant evaluation may improve understanding and conceptualization of the post-transplantation patient experience and aid in shared decision-making with clinicians.

Outcomes of Heart Transplant Donation After Circulatory Death

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation using donation after circulatory death (DCD) allografts is increasingly common, expanding the donor pool and reducing transplant wait times. However, data remain limited on clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to compare 6-month and 1-year clinical outcomes between recipients of DCD hearts, most of them recovered with the use of normothermic regional perfusion (NRP), and recipients of donation after brain death (DBD) hearts.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective observational study of all adult heart-only transplants from January 2020 to January 2023. Recipient and donor data were abstracted from medical records and the United Network for Organ Sharing registry, respectively. Survival analysis and Cox regression were used to compare the groups.

RESULTS

During the study period, 385 adults (median age 57.4 years [IQR: 48.0-63.7 years]) underwent heart-only transplantation, including 122 (32%) from DCD donors, 83% of which were recovered with the use of NRP. DCD donors were younger and had fewer comorbidities than DBD donors. DCD recipients were less often hospitalized before transplantation and less likely to require pretransplantation temporary mechanical circulatory support compared with DBD recipients. There were no significant differences between groups in 1-year survival, incidence of severe primary graft dysfunction, treated rejection during the first year, or likelihood of cardiac allograft vasculopathy at 1 year after transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

In the largest single-center comparison of DCD and DBD heart transplantations to date, outcomes among DCD recipients are noninferior to those of DBD recipients. This study adds to the published data supporting DCD donors as a safe means to expand the heart donor pool.

Impact of Previous Conventional Cardiac Surgery on the Clinical Outcomes After Heart Transplantation

The impact of the type, purpose, and timing of prior surgery on heart transplantation (HT) remains unclear. This study investigated the influence of conventional cardiac surgery (PCCS) on HT outcomes. This study analyzed HTs performed between 1999 and 2019 at a single institution. Patients were categorized into two groups: those with and without PCCS. Short-term outcomes, including post-transplant complications and mortality rates, were evaluated. Cox proportional and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to identify risk factors for mortality and assess long-term survival, respectively. Of 368 patients, 29% had PCCS. Patients with PCCS had a higher incidence of post-transplant complications. The in-hospital and 1 year mortality rates were higher in the PCCS group. PCCS and cardiopulmonary bypass time were significant risk factors for 1 year mortality (hazard ratios = 2.485 and 1.005, respectively). The long-term survival rates were lower in the PCCS group, particularly in the first year. In sub-analysis, patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and PCCS had the poorest outcomes. The era of surgery and timing of PCCS in relation to HT did not significantly impact outcomes. In conclusion, PCCS worsen the HT outcomes, especially in patients with ischemic etiology. However, the timing of PCCS and era of HT did not significantly affect this concern.

Off-pump implantation of left ventricular assist device via minimally invasive left thoracotomy: Our single-center experience

Background

The aim of this study was to compare our experience of left ventricular assist device implantation via minimally invasive left thoracotomy with off-pump versus on-pump technique.

Methods

Between June 2013 and April 2020, nine patients (8 males, 1 female; mean age: 47±11.9 years; range, 30 to 61 years) who underwent off-pump left ventricular assist device implantation and nine patients (8 males, 1 female; mean age: 47±11.4 years; range, 29 to 60 years) who underwent on-pump minimally invasive left thoracotomy were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative outcomes and mid-term results of both groups were evaluated.

Results

Outflow graft was anastomosed to the ascending aorta with J-sternotomy in all patients. The median duration of intubation and intensive care unit stay were one (IQR: 1.5) day and eight (IQR: 6.5) days in the off-pump group, respectively and one (IQR: 0) day and seven (IQR: 7) days in the on-pump group, respectively. Intra-aortic balloon pump was needed during the weaning of cardiopulmonary bypass in one (11%) of the patients in both groups. Postoperative right ventricular failure was observed in two (22%) patients in the offpump group who were treated medically and recovered. There was no need for revision due to bleeding or postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenator implantation in either group. In the off-pump group, three patients underwent heart transplantation after median 854 (IQR: 960) days. Three patients died one month, two and four years after implantation. Three patients were still alive with left ventricular assist device and were being uneventfully followed for 365, 400, and 700 days after implantation.

Conclusion

Off-pump technique is safe and feasible option for implantation of left ventricular assist device via minimally invasive left thoracotomy.

The HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device as a strategy to bridge to transplant

PURPOSE

Recent changes in the market for left ventricular assist devices have resulted in the HeartMate 3 (HM3) being the only commercially-available device. This study evaluates the outcomes of patients with a HM3 waitlisted for and undergoing orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT).

METHODS

Patients waitlisted for isolated OHT with a HM3 or undergoing OHT after bridge-to-transplant (BTT) with a HM3 between 2015 and 2021 were identified from the UNOS registry and included in this study. Propensity matching was used to compare outcomes of BTT-HM3 versus primary OHT.

RESULTS

A total of 1321 patients supported with a HM3 underwent OHT during our study period. Unadjusted 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year survival following OHT in the BTT-HM3 cohort was 96.5%, 94.4%, and 90.7%, respectively. In propensity-matched analysis, 1103 BTT-HM3 patients were compared with 1103 primary OHT patients. Rates of post-OHT stroke were higher in the BTT-HM3 group (4.4% vs. 2.0%, p = .001). The BTT-HM3 group had lower 30-day survival (96.2% vs. 97.4%, p = .033) although 90-day (94.2% vs. 95.3%, p = .103) and 1-year survival (90.4% vs. 91.7%, p = .216) were comparable. A total of 1251 patients were supported with a HM3 at the time of OHT listing during the study period. At the time of this analysis, 60 (4.5%) remained on the waitlist, 991 (75.0%) underwent OHT, and 119 (9.0%) died or clinically deteriorated with waitlist removal.

CONCLUSIONS

The HM3 is a viable method for BTT with acceptable waitlist outcomes. Although 1-year survival is comparable to primary OHT, early outcomes are worse, suggesting that refinement of patient selection and perioperative management is prudent to optimizing outcomes.

Risk of Renal Dysfunction Following Heart Transplantation in Patients Bridged with a Left Ventricular Assist Device

Acute renal failure (ARF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are associated with short- and long-term morbidity and mortality following heart transplantation (HT). We investigated the incidence and risk factors for developing ARF requiring hemodialysis (HD) and CKD following HT specifically in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). We examined the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) Thoracic Transplant Registry for heart transplant patients between January 2000 and June 2015. We compared patients bridged with durable continuous-flow LVAD to those without LVAD support. Primary outcomes were ARF requiring HD before discharge following HT and CKD (defined as creatinine >2.5 mg/dl, permanent dialysis, or renal transplant) within 3 years. There were 18,738 patients, with 4,535 (24%) bridged with LVAD support. Left ventricular assist device patients had higher incidence of ARF requiring HD and CKD at 1 year, but no significant difference in CKD at 3 years compared to non-LVAD patients. Among LVAD patients, body mass index (BMI) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.79, p < 0.001), baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (OR = 0.43, p < 0.001), and ischemic time (OR = 1.28, p = 0.014) were significantly associated with ARF requiring HD. Similarly, BMI (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.49, p < 0.001), baseline eGFR (HR = 0.41, p < 0.001), pre-HT diabetes mellitus (DM) (HR = 1.37, p = 0.011), and post-HT dialysis before discharge (HR = 3.93, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with CKD. Left ventricular assist device patients have a higher incidence of ARF requiring HD and CKD at 1 year after HT compared with non-LVAD patients, but incidence of CKD is similar by 3 years. Baseline renal function, BMI, ischemic time, and DM can help identify LVAD patients at risk of ARF requiring HD or CKD following HT.

Impact of prior sternotomy on survival and allograft function after heart transplantation: A single center matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) remains the gold standard for the treatment of end-stage heart failure. The number of patients who have had at least one prior sternotomy while awaiting transplantation has increased over the years reaching 50% in the last ISHLT registry report. We analysed our institutional transplant activity focusing on prior-sternotomy setting to identify the real burden of this preoperative variable and its potential consequences.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2020, a total of 512 consecutive adult patients underwent OHT. We divided them into two groups according to the previous sternotomy variable: a prior sternotomy group (PS-group, n = 131, 25.6%) and a heart transplant as first sternotomy group (FS-group, n = 381, 74.4%). After propensity score matching, a total of 106 matched-pairs were identified for the final analysis.

RESULTS

The overall 30-day mortality was similar in the two groups (7.5% vs. 5.7%, p = .58). The prior sternotomy was not an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality (odds ratio: 0.89, p = .81). In the matched sample, prior cardiac surgery was not predictive for any major postoperative complication: primary graft failure, AKI, bleeding, acute respiratory insufficiency, need for extra-corporeal life support (p > .05). The log-rank test revealed no significant difference between the two groups in the unmatched and matched pools (p = .93 and 0.69 respectively. At univariable analysis prior sternotomy was not associated with an increased risk of posttransplant mortality (hazard ratio: 0.87, p = .599).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite it increases surgical complexity, the reoperation alone does not represent a proper risk factor and among different co-variates that may affect post-OHT outcomes.

Effect of novel bicaval anastomosis technique for transplantation with and without prior cardiac surgery history

Background

To evaluate the graft outcomes after orthotopic heart transplantation (HTx) with a novel bicaval anastomosis technique between recipients with and without a history of prior cardiac surgery.

Methods

Of 70 patients who underwent HTx with a novel four-corners traction bicaval anastomosis technique from August 2017 to November 2019, 60 recipients underwent the HTx procedure as their first cardiac surgery (group A), while 10 recipients underwent HTx after prior cardiac surgery (group B). Patients in the two groups were compared in terms of their preoperative baseline variables such as etiological categories, history of blood transfusion and panel reactive antibody (PRA), intraoperative operation time and blood infusion volume, postoperative treatment time, and complications such as acute rejection and 30-day mortality as well as survival rates.

Results

Preoperative variables were comparable in group A and group B except for the history of blood transfusion (0% vs. 90.0%, P<0.001, respectively); the level of PRA was 7.5%±5.8% and 9.5%±10.9% for group A and B, respectively (P=0.583), but the time of the operation was nearly 1 hour longer for group B than group A (all P<0.05). No cases of left atrial thrombosis and donor heart distortion were observed in either group. Reoperation (1.7% vs. 10.0%, P=0.267), infection (0% vs. 10.0%, P=0.142), other postoperative complications as well as the 30-day mortality (1.7% vs. 10.0%, P=0.267), and postoperative survival rates (91.5% vs. 90.0%, P=0.805) were comparable between the two groups (all P>0.05).

Conclusions

Four-corner traction bicaval anastomosis combined with a continuous everting suture technique may result in approximately comparable prognoses for heart recipients with a history of cardiac surgery when compared with those without a history of cardiac surgery and this technique may reduce the incidence of left atrial thrombosis and distortion. Further follow-up of the long-term outcomes will be required to validate these results.

The Stanford experience of heart transplantation over five decades

AIMS 

Since 1968, heart transplantation has become the definitive treatment for patients with end-stage heart failure. We aimed to summarize our experience in heart transplantation at Stanford University since the first transplantation performed over 50 years ago.

METHODS AND RESULTS 

From 6 January 1968 to 30 November 2020, 2671 patients presented to Stanford University for heart transplantation, of which 1958 were adult heart transplantations. Descriptive analyses were performed for patients in 1968-95 (n = 639). Stabilized inverse probability weighting was applied to compare patients in 1996-2006 (n = 356) vs. 2007-19 (n = 515). Follow-up data were updated through 2020. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Prior to weighting, recipients in 2007-19 vs. those in 1996-2006 were older and had heavier burden of chronic diseases. After the application of stabilized inverse probability weighting, the distance organ travelled increased from 84.2 ± 111.1 miles to 159.3 ± 169.9 miles from 1996-2006 to 2007-19. Total allograft ischaemia time also increased over time (199.6 ± 52.7 vs. 225.3 ± 50.0 min). Patients in 2007-19 showed superior survival than those in 1996-2006 with a median survival of 12.1 vs. 11.1 years.

CONCLUSION 

In this half-century retrospective descriptive study from one of the largest heart transplant programmes in the USA, long-term survival after heart transplantation has improved over time despite increased recipient and donor age, worsening comorbidities, increased technical complexity, and prolonged total allograft ischaemia time. Further investigation is warranted to delineate factors associated with the excellent outcomes observed in this study.

Bridging With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Under the New Heart Allocation System: A United Network for Organ Sharing Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of the new donor heart allocation system on survival following bridging to transplantation with venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation remains unknown. The new allocation system places extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-supported candidates at the highest status.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adults bridged to single-organ heart transplantation with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation from October 2006 to February 2020. Association between implementation of the new system and recipient survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates, Cox proportional hazards models, and propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of 364 recipients included, 173 and 191 were transplanted under new and old systems, respectively. Compared with the old system, waitlist time was halved under the new system (5 versus 10 days, P<0.01); recipients also demonstrated lower rates of prior cardiac surgery (32.9% versus 44.5%, P=0.03) and preoperative ventilation (30.6% versus 42.4%, P=0.02). Unadjusted 180-day survival was 90.2% (95% CI, 84.7%-94.2%) and 69.6% (95% CI, 62.6%-76.1%) under the new and old systems, respectively. Cox proportional hazards analysis demonstrated listing and transplantation under the new system to be an independent predictor of post-transplant survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.34 [95% CI 0.20-0.59]). Propensity score matching demonstrated a similar trend (hazard ratio, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.19-0.66]). Candidates listed under the new system were significantly less likely to experience waitlist mortality or deterioration (subhazard ratio, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.25-0.58]) and more likely to survive to transplant (subhazard ratio, 4.29 [95% CI, 3.32-5.54]).

CONCLUSIONS

Recipients transplanted following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation bridging to transplantation under the new system achieve greater 180-day survival compared with the old and demonstrate less preoperative comorbidity. Waitlist outcomes have also improved significantly under the new allocation system.

Continuous-flow left ventricular assist device versus orthotopic heart transplantation in adults with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Due to the lack of donor hearts, many studies have assessed the prognosis of heart failure (HF) patients treated with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD). However, previous results have not been consistent and minimal data is available regarding long-term outcomes. There is no consensus on whether CF-LVAD as a bridge or destination therapy (DT) can equal orthotopic heart transplantation (HTx). The purpose of our study is to compare clinical outcomes between CF-LVAD and HTx in adults.

Methods

We searched controlled trials from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until July 1, 2020. The mortality at different time points and adverse events were analyzed among 12 included studies.

Results

No significant differences were found in mortality at one-year [odds ratio (OR) =1.08; 95% CI: 0.97-1.21], two-year (OR =1.01; 95% CI: 0.91-1.12), three-year (OR =1.02; 95% CI: 0.69-1.51), and five-year (OR =1.02; 95% CI: 0.93-1.11), as well as the comparison of stroke, bleeding, and infection between CF-LVAD as a bridge versus HTx. The pooled analysis of one-year mortality (OR =2.76; 95% CI: 0.38-20.18) and two-year mortality (OR =1.64; 95% CI: 0.22-12.23) revealed no significant difference between CF-LVAD DT and HTx. Comparisons of adverse events showed no differences in bleeding or infection, but a higher risk of stroke (OR =5.09; 95% CI: 1.74-14.84) for patients treated with CF-LVAD DT than with HTx.

Conclusions

CF-LVAD as a bridge results in similar outcomes as HTx within five years. CF-LVAD as a DT is associated with similar one-year and two-year mortality, but carries a higher risk of stroke, as compared with HTx.

Impact of Less Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation on Heart Transplant Outcomes

Left ventricular assist device implantation without sternotomy (LIS) may simplify heart transplantation (HTX) by avoiding adhesions and eliminating the need for a re-sternotomy. This study investigates the impact of LIS LVAD implantation on HTX outcomes. A retrospective comparison of 46 patients undergoing HTX between 07/13 and 06/19 after conventional LVAD implantation with a full sternotomy (FS) and LIS LVAD implantation (LIS: n = 27 patients, 59%; FS: n = 19 patients, 41%) was performed. Endpoints were perioperative data including blood product use, de-novo formation of donor specific antibodies (DSAs) and survival. Patient demographics (mean age FS: 60.3 ± 9.3 years vs LIS 58.0 ± 7.7 years, P = 0.313; male gender FS: 84% vs LIS: 82%, P = 1.000; urgent HTX FS: 16% vs LIS 18%, P = 1.000) were comparable between LIS and FS patients. The primary finding was a significantly higher risk to develop de novo donor specific antibodies (DSAs) after HTX in patients of the FS group (FS: 36% vs LIS: 4%; P = 0.006). LIS patients had a significant reduction of intraoperative packed red blood cells (PRBCs) use (LIS: 4 (IQR 2-7) Units vs FS: 7 (IQR 4-8) Units; P = 0.045). Other adverse events rates and in-hospital mortality (LIS: 7% vs FS 5%, P = 1.000) were comparable between both groups. LIS LVAD reduces formation of donor specific antibodies after HTX.

Heart Transplantation After Ventricular Assist Device Therapy: Benefits, Risks, and Outcomes

Heart transplantation is an established treatment for end-stage heart failure. Due to the increase in demand and persistent scarcity of organ, mechanical circulatory devices have played a major role in therapy for advanced heart failure. Usage of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has gone up from 6% in 2006 to 43% in 2013 as per the United Network of Organ Sharing database. Majority of patients presenting for a heart transplantation are often bridged with an assist device prior for management of heart failure while on wait-list. On one hand, it is well established that LVADs improve survival on wait-list; on the other hand, the effect of LVAD on morbidity and survival after a heart transplantation is still unclear. In this article, we review the available literature and attempt to infer the outcomes given the risks and benefits of heart transplantation with prior LVAD patients.

Resternotomy does not adversely affect outcome after left ventricular assist device implantation

Background

Resternotomy in cardiac surgery is considered a risk factor for postoperative complications. Previous studies have demonstrated an ambiguous relationship between resternotomy and clinical outcomes. Registry data from a mixed population of durable circulatory support devices suggest that history of cardiac surgery is a risk factor for mortality. Our study investigates the prognostic significance of resternotomy in a homogenous cohort of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients.

Methods

The study included adult patients receiving a continuous-flow LVAD at our institution during the period 2010–2016. Postoperative adverse events and length of stay were analyzed. Survival was assessed at 6 months and by the end of the study. Multivariate risk factor analysis was conducted for independent predictors of death.

Results

One hundred twelve patients, who received an intrapericardial LVAD (HVAD, HeartWare), were included in our analysis. Twenty-four patients (21.4%) had a history of previous sternotomy. These patients were older and non-eligible for bridging, and had more frequently coronary heart disease. Univariate analysis demonstrated no differences in the observed complications postoperatively. Survival was similar among groups. Destination therapy was the only predictor of mortality in our analysis (p = 0.02).

Conclusions

Resternotomy was not associated with worse outcomes after LVAD implantation in our cohort.

Short-Term Experience with Off-Pump Versus On-Pump Implantation of the HeartWare Left Ventricular Assist Device

Implantation of left ventricular assist devices while avoiding cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) may decrease bleeding and improve postoperative recovery. To understand the effectiveness of this approach, we reviewed the charts of 26 patients who underwent HeartWare left ventricular assist device (HVAD) implantation without use of CPB (off-CPB group) and 22 patients who had HVAD implanted with CPB (CPB group) with an emphasis on the 30 day postoperative period. Preoperatively, both groups had similar demographic, functional, and hemodynamic characteristics. Off-CPB patients had significantly shorter surgery times than CPB patients, 188.5 (161.5-213.3) min versus 265.0 (247.5-299.5) min, respectively; p < 0.001. Blood transfusion requirements during surgery and within the postoperative 48 hour period were significantly lower in the off-CPB group than in the CPB group (odds ratio: 5.9; 95% confidence interval: 1.1-31.1, p = 0.042). Compared with the CPB group, the off-CPB group patients had a shorter intubation time, 21 (17.4-48.5) hours versus 41 (20.6-258.4) hours; p = 0.042. Intensive care unit stay was 7.0 (4.75-13.5) days for off-CPB versus 10.0 (6.0-19.0) days for CPB (p = 0.256). The off-CPB approach allows HVAD to be implanted quickly with significantly less perioperative bleeding and transfusion requirements and facilitates postoperative rehabilitation.