Prehabilitation among Patients Undergoing Non-Bariatric Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review

Effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients undergoing complex abdominal wall surgery

INTRODUCTION

Prehabilitation in the context of abdominal wall repair has received increasing interest as a strategy to improve postoperative outcomes by focusing on optimizing preoperative risk factors. The main approach includes nutritional counseling, exercise, and psychological intervention. The aim of this project was to assess whether a multimodal prehabilitation program for patients scheduled to undergo large ventral incisional hernia repair could modify the risk factors and optimize them for surgery. In addition, the impact on postoperative outcomes was evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective analysis included patients referred to a multimodal prehabilitation program preceding complex abdominal wall repair for incisional hernia between 2016 and 2020. The program comprised medical optimization, supervised and home-based exercise training, personalized nutrition plans, smoking cessation counseling, and psychological support. Patients were deemed optimized if they met one of the recommended criteria: weight loss ≥ 7% of total body weight, smoking cessation, or Hemoglobin A1c < 7%. Perioperative care adhered to an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway. Primary outcome was the number of patients reaching optimization criteria preoperatively. Secondary outcomes included functional capacity changes from baseline (six-minute walk test), length of stay, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Seventy consecutive patients were analyzed, with 57.1% completing the program (prehabilitation group) and 42.9% not (dropout group). Groups were similar in baseline characteristics. In the prehabilitation group, 27.5% were fully optimized, 45% partially optimized, and 82.5% underwent surgery, while 30% partially met criteria and 33.3% underwent surgery in the control group. Patients showed functional improvement (mean + 61 m in 6MWT), with no significant differences in postoperative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation positively impacted modifiable risk factors in hernia patients, aiding in their eligibility for complex abdominal wall surgery. Patients participating in the program experienced enhanced functional capacity, indicating the potential benefits of prehabilitation in optimizing surgical outcomes.

Multimodal prehabilitation and postoperative outcomes in upper abdominal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

The impact of multimodal prehabilitation on postoperative complications in upper abdominal surgeries is understudied. This review analyzes randomized trials on multimodal prehabilitation with patient and hospital outcomes. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for trials on prehabilitation before elective (non-emergency) abdominal surgery. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality. Primary outcomes of interest were postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and all-cause complications; secondary outcomes included hospital and intensive care length of stay. A meta-analysis with random-effect models was performed, and heterogeneity was evaluated with I-square and Cochran's Q test. Dichotomous variables were reported in log-odds ratio and continuous variables were presented as mean difference. Ten studies (total 1503 patients) were included. Odds of developing complications after prehabilitation were significantly lower compared to various control groups (- 0.38 [- 0.75- - 0.004], P = 0.048). Five studies described PPCs, and participants with prehabilitation had decreased odds of PPC (- 0.96 [- 1.38- - 0.54], P < 0.001). Prehabilitation did not significantly reduce length of stay, unless exercise was implemented; with exercise, hospital stay decreased significantly (- 0.91 [- 1.67- - 0.14], P = 0.02). Multimodal prehabilitation may decrease complications in upper abdominal surgery, but not necessarily length of stay; research should address heterogeneity in the literature.

Metabolic syndrome and surgical complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 million individuals

BACKGROUND

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is characterised by the presence of at least three of the five following components: insulin resistance, obesity, chronic hypertension, elevated serum triglycerides, and decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. It is estimated to affect 1 in 3 people around the globe and is reported to affect 46% of surgical patients. For people with MetS who undergo surgery, an emerging body of literature points to significantly poorer postoperative outcomes compared with nonaffected populations. The aim of this study is to review the current evidence on the risks of surgical complications in patients with MetS compared to those without MetS.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA and AMSTAR reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 63 studies involving 1 919 347 patients with MetS and 11 248 114 patients without MetS. Compared to individuals without the condition, individuals with MetS were at an increased risk of mortality (OR 1.75 95% CI: 1.36-2.24; P <0.01); all surgical site infection types as well as dehiscence (OR 1.64 95% CI: 1.52-1.77; P <0.01); cardiovascular complications (OR 1.56 95% CI: 1.41-1.73; P <0.01) including myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiac arrest, cardiac arrythmias and deep vein thrombosis; increased length of hospital stay (MD 0.65 95% CI: 0.39-0.9; P <0.01); and hospital readmission (OR 1.55 95% CI: 1.41-1.71; P <0.01).

CONCLUSION

MetS is associated with a significantly increased risk of surgical complications including mortality, surgical site infection, cardiovascular complications, increased length of stay, and hospital readmission. Despite these risks and the high prevalence of MetS in surgical populations there is a lack of evidence on interventions for reducing surgical complications in patients with MetS. The authors suggest prioritising interventions across the surgical continuum that include (1) preoperative screening for MetS; (2) surgical prehabilitation; (3) intraoperative monitoring and management; and (4) postoperative rehabilitation and follow-up.

Impact of Prehabilitation on Postoperative Mortality and the Need for Non-Home Discharge in High-Risk Surgical Patients

BACKGROUND

The preoperative period is an important target for interventions (eg Surgical Prehabilitation and Readiness [SPAR]) that can improve postoperative outcomes for older patients with comorbidities.

STUDY DESIGN

To determine whether a preoperative multidisciplinary prehabilitation program (SPAR) reduces postoperative 30-day mortality and the need for non-home discharge in high-risk surgical patients, surgical patients enrolled in a prehabilitation program targeting physical activity, pulmonary function, nutrition, and mindfulness were compared with historical control patients from 1 institution's American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP database. SPAR patients were propensity score-matched 1:3 to pre-SPAR NSQIP patients, and their outcomes were compared. The ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator was used to compare observed-to-expected ratios for postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 246 patients were enrolled in SPAR. A 6-month compliance audit revealed that overall patient adherence to the SPAR program was 89%. At the time of analysis, 118 SPAR patients underwent surgery with 30 days of follow-up. Compared with pre-SPAR NSQIP patients (n = 4,028), SPAR patients were significantly older with worse functional status and more comorbidities. Compared with propensity score-matched pre-SPAR NSQIP patients, SPAR patients had significantly decreased 30-day mortality (0% vs 4.1%, p = 0.036) and decreased need for discharge to postacute care facilities (6.5% vs 15.9%, p = 0.014). Similarly, SPAR patients exhibited decreased observed 30-day mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 0.41) and need for discharge to a facility (observed-to-expected ratio 0.56) compared with their expected outcomes using the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator.

CONCLUSIONS

The SPAR program is safe and feasible and may reduce postoperative mortality and the need for discharge to postacute care facilities in high-risk surgical patients.

Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Model to Identify Patients Before Surgery at High Risk for Postoperative Adverse Events

Importance

Identifying patients at high risk of adverse outcomes prior to surgery may allow for interventions associated with improved postoperative outcomes; however, few tools exist for automated prediction.

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy of an automated machine-learning model in the identification of patients at high risk of adverse outcomes from surgery using only data in the electronic health record.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prognostic study was conducted among 1 477 561 patients undergoing surgery at 20 community and tertiary care hospitals in the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) health network. The study included 3 phases: (1) building and validating a model on a retrospective population, (2) testing model accuracy on a retrospective population, and (3) validating the model prospectively in clinical care. A gradient-boosted decision tree machine learning method was used for developing a preoperative surgical risk prediction tool. The Shapley additive explanations method was used for model interpretability and further validation. Accuracy was compared between the UPMC model and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) surgical risk calculator for predicting mortality. Data were analyzed from September through December 2021.

Exposure

Undergoing any type of surgical procedure.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Postoperative mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) at 30 days were evaluated.

Results

Among 1 477 561 patients included in model development (806 148 females [54.5%; mean [SD] age, 56.8 [17.9] years), 1 016 966 patient encounters were used for training and 254 242 separate encounters were used for testing the model. After deployment in clinical use, another 206 353 patients were prospectively evaluated; an additional 902 patients were selected for comparing the accuracy of the UPMC model and NSQIP tool for predicting mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for mortality was 0.972 (95% CI, 0.971-0.973) for the training set and 0.946 (95% CI, 0.943-0.948) for the test set. The AUROC for MACCE and mortality was 0.923 (95% CI, 0.922-0.924) on the training and 0.899 (95% CI, 0.896-0.902) on the test set. In prospective evaluation, the AUROC for mortality was 0.956 (95% CI, 0.953-0.959), sensitivity was 2148 of 2517 patients (85.3%), specificity was 186 286 of 203 836 patients (91.4%), and negative predictive value was 186 286 of 186 655 patients (99.8%). The model outperformed the NSQIP tool as measured by AUROC (0.945 [95% CI, 0.914-0.977] vs 0.897 [95% CI, 0.854-0.941], for a difference of 0.048), specificity (0.87 [95% CI, 0.83-0.89] vs 0.68 [95% CI, 0.65-0.69]), and accuracy (0.85 [95% CI, 0.82-0.87] vs 0.69 [95% CI, 0.66, 0.72]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that an automated machine learning model was accurate in identifying patients undergoing surgery who were at high risk of adverse outcomes using only preoperative variables within the electronic health record, with superior performance compared with the NSQIP calculator. These findings suggest that using this model to identify patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes prior to surgery may allow for individualized perioperative care, which may be associated with improved outcomes.

Expert Consensus for Key Features of Operative Reports of Ventral Hernia

BACKGROUND

Operative reports are important documents; however, standards for critical elements of operative reports are general and often vague. Hernia surgery is one of the most common procedures performed by general surgeons, so the aim of this project was to develop a Delphi consensus on critical elements of a ventral hernia repair operative report.

STUDY DESIGN

The Delphi method was used to establish consensus on key features of operative reports for ventral hernia repair. An expert panel was selected and questionnaires were distributed. The first round of voting was open-ended to allow participants to recommend what details should be included. For the second round the questionnaire was distributed with the items that did not have unanimous responses along with free text comments from the first round.

RESULTS

Eighteen surgeons were approached, of which 11 completed both rounds. Twenty items were on the initial questionnaire, of which 11 had 100% agreement. Of the remaining 9 items, after the second questionnaire an additional 7 reached consensus.

CONCLUSION

Ventral hernia repairs are a common and challenging problem and often require reoperations. Surgeons frequently refer to previous operative notes to guide future procedures, which requires detailed and comprehensive operative reports. This Delphi consensus was able to identify key components needed for an operative report describing ventral hernia repair.

Preparing for colorectal surgery: a qualitative study of experiences and preferences of patients in Western Canada

Objectives

The burden and costs of abdominal surgery for chronic conditions are on the rise, but could be reduced through self-management support. However, structured support to prepare for colorectal surgery is not routinely offered to patients in Canada. This study aimed to describe experiences and explore preferences for multimodal prehabilitation among colorectal surgery patients.

Methods

A qualitative descriptive study using three focus groups (FG) was held with 19 patients who had a surgical date for abdominal surgery (April 2017-April 2018) and lived close (≤ 50 km radius) to a tertiary hospital in Western Canada (including a Surgical Lead for the British Columbia Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Collaborative). FGs were audio-taped and verbatim transcribed with coding and pile-and-sort methods performed by two independent reviewers, confirmed by a third reviewer, in NVivo v9 software; followed by thematic analysis and narrative synthesis.

Results

Four themes emerged: support, informed decision-making, personalization of care, and mental/emotional health, which patients felt was particularly important but rarely addressed. Patient preferences for prehabilitation programming emphasised regular support from a single professional source, simple health messages, convenient access, and flexibility.

Conclusions

There is an unmet need for structured preoperative support to better prepare patients for colorectal surgery. Future multimodal prehabilitation should be flexible and presented with non-medical information so patients can make informed decisions about their preoperative care and surgical outcomes. Healthcare providers have an important role in encouraging healthy lifestyle changes before colorectal surgery, though clearer communication and accurate advice on self-care, particularly mental health, are needed for improving patient outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08130-y.

• Optimising preoperative care for abdominal surgery patients could improve outcomes.

• Patient experiences of preparing for colorectal surgery could inform future interventions, but patient-oriented research to improve quality of care is scarce.

• There is an unmet need for preoperative support in colorectal surgery.

• Future multimodal prehabilitation should incorporate patient preferences.

Severe Short Bowel Syndrome: Prognosis for Nutritional Independence Through Management by a Multidisciplinary Nutrition Service and Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Short bowel syndrome (SBS) is a debilitating condition associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Historically, SBS patients require indefinite parenteral nutrition (PN) and endure lifelong nutritional challenges. The purpose of this study was to review the outcomes, specifically nutritional independence, of a multidisciplinary nutrition service.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of SBS patients followed by our surgical nutrition service was performed. Patients without 1-year follow-up were excluded. Demographics and nutritional parameters were collected at 4 intervals: initial presentation, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year follow-up. Short bowel syndrome anatomical subtypes identified through operative reports were characterized as end jejunostomy, jejunocolonic, or jejuno-ileocolonic with ileo-cecal valve intact. Intestinal failure was defined by the requirement of PN, while intestinal insufficiency was defined by enteral support requirement. Clinical outcomes examined included mortality, fistula closure, and nutritional independence.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 89 patients, 50 of whom had ≤ 100 cm intestinal length. Mean age was 57 ± 17y, 55 (62%) were female, and median initial intestinal length was 77 [60-120] cm. Short bowel syndrome was complicated by fistulas in 47 (53%) of patients. Overall mortality was 13%, and 67 (75%) were liberated from PN. A total of 58 (65%) underwent operative intervention and fistula closure was achieved in 37 of 47 (79%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Short bowel syndrome patients can experience significant benefit under treatment by a multidisciplinary nutrition service. By incorporating surgical intervention, the majority of patients previously relegated to lifelong PN have the opportunity to become nutritionally independent within 5 years.

Trimodal prehabilitation for older surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the postoperative effectiveness of trimodal prehabilitation in older surgical patients.

METHODS

We searched Medline, PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of older surgical patients who underwent trimodal prehabilitation. We performed a meta-analysis to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and weighted mean difference (MD) for continuous data. Primary outcomes were postoperative mortality and complications, and the secondary outcomes were the 6-min walk test (6MWT) at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery, readmission, and length of hospital stay (LOS). This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020201347).

RESULTS

We included 10 studies (four RCTs and six cohort studies) comprising 1553 older surgical patients (trimodal prehabilitation group, n = 581; control group, n = 972). There were no significant differences in postoperative mortality (RR 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-3.35) and postoperative complications (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.76-1.09). Prehabilitation did not reduce readmission (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.61-1.38) and LOS (MD 0.10; 95% CI  - 0.34-0.53). In a sub-analysis, trimodal prehabilitation did not significantly improve postoperative mortality, postoperative complications, readmission rates, or LOS when compared with standard care. However, trimodal prehabilitation significantly improved the 6MWT at 4 weeks after surgery (MD 37.49; 95% CI 5.81-69.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that trimodal prehabilitation did not reduce postoperative mortality and complications significantly but improved postoperative functional status in older surgical patients. Therefore, more high-quality trials are required.

Prehabilitation in adult patients undergoing surgery: an umbrella review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

The certainty that prehabilitation improves postoperative outcomes is not clear. The objective of this umbrella review (i.e. systematic review of systematic reviews) was to synthesise and evaluate evidence for prehabilitation in improving health, experience, or cost outcomes.

METHODS

We performed an umbrella review of prehabilitation systematic reviews. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Joanna Briggs Institute's database, and Web of Science were searched (inception to October 20, 2020). We included all systematic reviews of elective, adult patients undergoing surgery and exposed to a prehabilitation intervention, where health, experience, or cost outcomes were reported. Evidence certainty was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Primary syntheses of any prehabilitation were stratified by surgery type.

RESULTS

From 1412 titles, 55 systematic reviews were included. For patients with cancer undergoing surgery who participate in any prehabilitation, moderate certainty evidence supports improvements in functional recovery. Low to very low certainty evidence supports reductions in complications (mixed, cardiovascular, and cancer surgery), non-home discharge (orthopaedic surgery), and length of stay (mixed, cardiovascular, and cancer surgery). There was low to very low certainty evidence that exercise prehabilitation reduces the risk of complications, non-home discharge, and length of stay. There was low to very low certainty evidence that nutritional prehabilitation reduces risk of complications, mortality, and length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Low certainty evidence suggests that prehabilitation may improve postoperative outcomes. Future low risk of bias, randomised trials, synthesised using recommended standards, are required to inform practice. Optimal patient selection, intervention design, and intervention duration must also be determined.

Prehabilitation for Bariatric Surgery: A Randomized, Controlled Trial Protocol and Pilot Study

Bariatric surgery is the most efficacious treatment for obesity, though it is not free from complications. Preoperative conditioning has proved beneficial in various clinical contexts, but the evidence is scarce on the role of prehabilitation in bariatric surgery. We describe the protocol and pilot study of a randomized (ratio 1:1), parallel, controlled trial assessing the effect of a physical conditioning and respiratory muscle training programme, added to a standard 8-week group intervention based on therapeutical education and cognitive-behavioural therapy, in patients awaiting bariatric surgery. The primary outcome is preoperative weight-loss. Secondary outcomes include associated comorbidity, eating behaviour, physical activity, quality of life, and short-term postoperative complications. A pilot sample of 15 participants has been randomized to the intervention or control groups and their baseline features and results are described. Only 5 patients completed the group programme and returned for assessment. Measures to improve adherence will be implemented and once the COVID-19 pandemic allows, the clinical trial will start. This is the first randomized, clinical trial assessing the effect of physical and respiratory prehabilitation, added to standard group education and cognitive-behavioural intervention in obese patients on the waiting list for bariatric surgery. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT0404636.

The impact of obesity and severe obesity on postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The impact of obesity on postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy remains insufficiently studied.

METHODS

All pancreatoduodenectomy patients were abstracted from the 2014 to 2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data sets and were stratified into the following 3 body mass index categories: non-obese (body mass index 18.5-29.9), class 1/2 obesity (body mass index 30-39.9), and class 3 severe obesity (body mass index ≥ 40). Analyses tested associations between patient factors and four 30-day postoperative outcomes: mortality, composite morbidity, delayed gastric emptying, and postoperative pancreatic fistula. Multivariable logistic regression models tested independent associations between patient factors and these 4 outcome measures.

RESULTS

A total of 16,823 patients were included in the study: 12,234 (72.7%) non-obese, 4,030 (24%) obese, and 559 (3.3%) with severe obesity. Bivariable analyses demonstrated significant associations between obesity, severe obesity, and greater proportions of numerous preoperative comorbidities as well as a greater likelihood of postoperative complications, including postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, composite morbidity, and mortality (all P ≤ .001). After adjusting for significant covariates, obesity was independently associated with postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval: 1.33-1.67, P < .001), delayed gastric emptying (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.28, P = .004), composite morbidity (odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.38, P < .001), and mortality (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval: 1.36-2.36, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Obesity and severe obesity are significantly associated with worse short-term outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. Preoperative considerations, such as weight management strategies during individualized treatment planning, could improve outcomes in this population.

Patient quality of life before and after ventral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Recurrence is often reported as the primary outcome among studies of patients with hernias; however, there is growing interest in patient quality of life. The relationship between quality of life and recurrence is poorly understood. This study evaluates this relationship.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of 3 prospective clinical trials was performed. The modified Activities Assessment Scale, a validated, abdominal wall-specific quality of life tool was used (1 = poor quality of life and 100 = perfect quality of life). Patients with and without a hernia recurrence were compared. Baseline quality of life, follow-up quality of life, and change in quality of life were measured. The relationship between quality of life and clinical outcomes was examined.

RESULTS

A total of 238 patients were followed for median (range) 30 (14-44) months, of whom 31 (13.0%) had a clinical recurrence, whereas 207 (87.0%) had no clinical recurrence. Patients with recurrence were more likely to have a lower mean baseline quality of life (14 vs 26; P = .035), follow-up quality of life (42 vs 82; P < .001), and change in quality of life (19 vs 33; P < .018). The majority of patients with or without recurrence still experienced an improvement in quality of life (68% vs 79%; P = .142).

CONCLUSION

Patients with lower baseline quality of life are likely to experience a recurrence following repair; however, most still report substantial improvements in quality of life. Assessing follow-up quality of life without accounting for baseline quality of life is incomplete; follow-up quality of life should be assessed with appropriate adjustment for baseline quality of life.