The effect of trimodal prehabilitation on the physical and psychological health of patients undergoing colorectal surgery: a randomised clinical trial

Towards a common definition of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

There is no universally accepted definition for surgical prehabilitation. The objectives of this scoping review were to (1) identify how surgical prehabilitation is defined across randomised controlled trials and (2) propose a common definition.

METHODS

The final search was conducted in February 2023 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, and psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery. Qualitative data were analysed using summative content analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 76 prehabilitation trials of patients undergoing abdominal (n=26, 34%), orthopaedic (n=20, 26%), thoracic (n=14, 18%), cardiac (n=7, 9%), spinal (n=4, 5%), and other (n=5, 7%) surgeries. Surgical prehabilitation was explicitly defined in more than half of these RCTs (n=42, 55%). Our findings consolidated the following definition: 'Prehabilitation is a process from diagnosis to surgery, consisting of one or more preoperative interventions of exercise, nutrition, psychological strategies and respiratory training, that aims to enhance functional capacity and physiological reserve to allow patients to withstand surgical stressors, improve postoperative outcomes, and facilitate recovery.'

CONCLUSIONS

A common definition is the first step towards standardisation, which is needed to guide future high-quality research and advance the field of prehabilitation. The proposed definition should be further evaluated by international stakeholders to ensure that it is comprehensive and globally accepted.

What is the role of physical exercise in the era of cancer prehabilitation? A systematic review

PURPOSE

Exercise before surgery, as part of prehabilitation, aiming to enhance patients' functional and physiological capacity, has become widespread, necessitating an in-depth understanding.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on Pubmed, Cochrane, and Scopus to examine the effect of exercise as prehabilitation, alone or in combination with other interventions, in patients with cancer. Interventional studies applying a single-arm, randomized controlled, or nonrandomized design were included.

RESULTS

A total of 97 studies were included, and categorized according to cancer types, i.e., gynecological, breast, urological, gastrointestinal and lung cancer. For each cancer site, the effect of exercise, on physical fitness parameters and postoperative outcomes, including length of hospital stay and postoperative complications, was reported.

CONCLUSION

Exercise as prehabilitation may have an important role in improving physical fitness, postoperative outcomes, and accelerating recovery, especially in certain types of malignancies.

Outcomes reported in randomised trials of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneity of reported outcomes can impact the certainty of evidence for prehabilitation. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically map outcomes and assessment tools used in trials of surgical prehabilitation.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched in February 2023. Randomised controlled trials of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery were included. Reported outcomes were classified according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research framework.

RESULTS

We included 76 trials, mostly focused on abdominal or orthopaedic surgeries. A total of 50 different outcomes were identified, measured using 184 outcome assessment tools. Observer-reported outcomes were collected in 86% of trials (n=65), with hospital length of stay being most common. Performance outcomes were reported in 80% of trials (n=61), most commonly as exercise capacity assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Clinician-reported outcomes were included in 78% (n=59) of trials and most frequently included postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo classification. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 76% (n=58) of trials, with health-related quality of life using the 36- or 12-Item Short Form Survey being most prevalent. Biomarker outcomes were reported in 16% of trials (n=12) most commonly using inflammatory markers assessed with C-reactive protein.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial heterogeneity in the reporting of outcomes and assessment tools across surgical prehabilitation trials. Identification of meaningful outcomes, and agreement on appropriate assessment tools, could inform the development of a prehabilitation core outcomes set to harmonise outcome reporting and facilitate meta-analyses.

The Impact of Symptoms of Depression, Anxiety, and Low Stress-Coping Capacity on the Effects of Telephone Follow-Up on Recovery Measures After Hysterectomy

Background

To investigate if symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress-coping capacity have an impact on the effect of telephone follow-up (TFU) on trajectories of six recovery measures after hysterectomy and influence the occurrence of unplanned telephone contacts (uTCs) and unplanned visits (uVs) to health care providers.

Material and Methods

A post hoc nonrandomized analysis of participants enrolled in a randomized, four-armed, single-blinded, controlled multicenter intervention study comprising 487 women where the women were allocated 1:1:1:1 to one of four TFU models. The Swedish Postoperative Symptom Questionnaire (SPSQ) and two health-related quality of life questionnaires, the EuroQoL-5 dimension with three levels (EQ-5 D-3 L) and the Short-Form-Health Survey (SF-36) assessed the recovery measures. The six recovery measures consisted of the EQ-5D-3L health index, the SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS), and the maximum and average pain intensity, and symptom sum score obtained from the SPSQ. Psychological distress was evaluated by the psychometric forms, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Stress Coping Inventory. The occurrence of uTC and uV within the 6 weeks of follow-up was registered.

Results

Preoperative anxiety, depression, and stress-coping capacity did not modify the effects of the TFU models on the trajectories of the recovery measures, although anxiety and depression were strongly associated with all six recovery measures. uTCs, but not uVs occurred more often in the women with anxiety.

Conclusions

Preoperative anxiety, depression, and stress-coping capacity did not appear to influence the effects of TFU contacts on the recovery measures after hysterectomy. Preoperative anxiety seemed to increase the occurrence of uTC. Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01526668).

The impact of prehabilitation on outcomes in frail and high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Prehabilitation comprises multidisciplinary preoperative interventions including exercise, nutritional optimisation and psychological preparation aimed at improving surgical outcomes. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the impact of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes in frail and high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Embase, Medline, CINAHAL and Cochrane databases were searched from January 2010 to January 2023 for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating unimodal (exercise) or multimodal prehabilitation programmes. Meta-analysis was limited to length of stay (primary end point), severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification ≥ Grade 3) and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). The analysis was performed using RevMan v5.4 software.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies (6 RCTs, 10 observational) reporting on 3339 patients (1468 prehabilitation group, 1871 control group) were included. The median (interquartile range) age was 74.0 (71.0-78.4) years. Multimodal prehabilitation was applied in fifteen studies and unimodal in one. Meta-analysis of nine studies showed a reduction in hospital length of stay (weighted mean difference -1.07 days, 95 % CI -1.60 to -0.53 days, P < 0.0001, I2 = 19 %). Ten studies addressed severe complications and a meta-analysis suggested a decline in occurrence by up to 44 % (odds ratio 0.56, 95 % CI 0.37 to 0.82, P < 0.004, I2 = 51 %). Four studies provided data on preoperative 6MWT. The pooled weighted mean difference was 40.1 m (95 % CI 32.7 to 47.6 m, P < 0.00001, I2 = 24 %), favouring prehabilitation.

CONCLUSION

Given the significant impact on shortening length of stay and reducing severe complications, prehabilitation should be encouraged in frail, older and high-risk adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Cancer symptom burden negatively affects health-related quality of life in patients undergoing prehabilitation prior to liver resection: results from a 12-week randomized controlled trial

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Cancer symptoms negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with cancer awaiting liver resection. Prehabilitation maintained HRQoL after surgery. Future studies should test whether relieving cancer symptoms can improve HRQoL.

Impact of sarcopenia on outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgeons have historically used age as a preoperative predictor of postoperative outcomes. Sarcopenia, the loss of skeletal muscle mass due to disease or biological age, has been proposed as a more accurate risk predictor. The prognostic value of sarcopenia assessment in surgical patients remains poorly understood. Therefore, the authors aimed to synthesize the available literature and investigate the impact of sarcopenia on perioperative and postoperative outcomes across all surgical specialties.

METHODS

The authors systematically assessed the prognostic value of sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to 1st October 2022. Their primary outcomes were complication occurrence, mortality, length of operation and hospital stay, discharge to home, and postdischarge survival rate at 1, 3, and 5 years. Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Sensitivity analysis was performed by focusing on studies with an oncological, cardiovascular, emergency, or transplant surgery population and on those of higher quality or prospective study design.

RESULTS

A total of 294 studies comprising 97 643 patients, of which 33 070 had sarcopenia, were included in our analysis. Sarcopenia was associated with significantly poorer postoperative outcomes, including greater mortality, complication occurrence, length of hospital stay, and lower rates of discharge to home (all P <0.00001). A significantly lower survival rate in patients with sarcopenia was noted at 1, 3, and 5 years (all P <0.00001) after surgery. Subgroup analysis confirmed higher rates of complications and mortality in oncological (both P <0.00001), cardiovascular (both P <0.00001), and emergency ( P =0.03 and P =0.04, respectively) patients with sarcopenia. In the transplant surgery cohort, mortality was significantly higher in patients with sarcopenia ( P <0.00001). Among all patients undergoing surgery for inflammatory bowel disease, the frequency of complications was significantly increased among sarcopenic patients ( P =0.007). Sensitivity analysis based on higher quality studies and prospective studies showed that sarcopenia remained a significant predictor of mortality and complication occurrence (all P <0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Sarcopenia is a significant predictor of poorer outcomes in surgical patients. Preoperative assessment of sarcopenia can help surgeons identify patients at risk, critically balance eligibility, and refine perioperative management. Large-scale studies are required to further validate the importance of sarcopenia as a prognostic indicator of perioperative risk, especially in surgical subspecialties.

Impact of preoperative uni- or multimodal prehabilitation on postoperative morbidity: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complications occur in up to 43% of patients after surgery, resulting in increased morbidity and economic burden. Prehabilitation has the potential to increase patients' preoperative health status and thereby improve postoperative outcomes. However, reported results of prehabilitation are contradictory. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the effects of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes (postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, pain at postoperative day 1) in patients undergoing elective surgery.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs published between January 2006 and June 2023 comparing prehabilitation programmes lasting ≥14 days to 'standard of care' (SOC) and reporting postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Database searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO. The primary outcome examined was the effect of uni- or multimodal prehabilitation on 30-day complications. Secondary outcomes were length of ICU and hospital stay (LOS) and reported pain scores.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (including 2090 patients randomized in a 1:1 ratio) met the inclusion criteria. Average methodological study quality was moderate. There was no difference between prehabilitation and SOC groups in regard to occurrence of postoperative complications (OR = 1.02, 95% c.i. 0.93 to 1.13; P = 0.10; I2 = 34%), total hospital LOS (-0.13 days; 95% c.i. -0.56 to 0.28; P = 0.53; I2 = 21%) or reported postoperative pain. The ICU LOS was significantly shorter in the prehabilitation group (-0.57 days; 95% c.i. -1.10 to -0.04; P = 0.03; I2 = 46%). Separate comparison of uni- and multimodal prehabilitation showed no difference for either intervention.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation reduces ICU LOS compared with SOC in elective surgery patients but has no effect on overall complication rates or total LOS, regardless of modality. Prehabilitation programs need standardization and specific targeting of those patients most likely to benefit.

Perioperative optimisation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): A systematic review and meta-analysis of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have largely been incorporated into practice in high-income settings due to proven improvement in perioperative outcomes. We aimed to review the implementation of ERAS protocols and other perioperative optimisation strategies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and their impact on length of hospital stay (LOS).

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, Global Health (CABI), WHO Global Index Medicus, Index Medicus, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) for studies incorporating ERAS or other prehabilitation approaches in LMICs. We conducted a pooled analysis of LOS using a random-effects model to evaluate the impact of such programs. This systematic review was pre-registered on PROSPERO.

Results

We screened 1205 studies and included 70 for a full-text review; six were eligible for inclusion and five for quantitative analysis, two of which were randomised controlled trials. ERAS was compared to routine practice in all included studies, while none implemented prehabilitation or other preoperative optimisation strategies. Pooled analysis of 290 patients showed reduced LOS in the ERAS group with a standardised mean difference of -2.18 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -4.13, -.0.05, P < 0.01). The prediction interval was wide (95% CI = -7.85, 3.48) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 94%).

Conclusions

Perioperative optimisation is feasible in LMICs and appears to reduce LOS, despite high levels of between-study heterogeneity. There is a need for high-quality data on perioperative practice in LMICs and supplementary qualitative analysis to further understand barriers to perioperative optimisation implementation.

Registration

PROSPERO: CRD42021279053.

Prehabilitation for general surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation seeks to optimize patient health before surgery to improve outcomes. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted on prehabilitation, however an updated synthesis of this evidence is required across General Surgery to inform potential Supplementary discipline-level protocols. Accordingly, this systematic review of RCTs aimed to evaluate the use of prehabilitation interventions across the discipline of General Surgery.

METHODS

This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023403289), and adhered to PRISMA 2020 and SWiM guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE and Ovid Embase were searched to 4 March 2023 for RCTs evaluating prehabilitation interventions within the discipline of General Surgery. After data extraction, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Quantitative and qualitative data were synthesized and analysed. However, meta-analysis was precluded due to heterogeneity across included studies.

RESULTS

From 929 records, 36 RCTs of mostly low risk of bias were included. 17 (47.2%) were from Europe, and 14 (38.9%) North America. 30 (83.3%) investigated cancer populations. 31 (86.1%) investigated physical interventions, finding no significant difference in 16 (51.6%) and significant improvement in 14 (45.2%). Nine (25%) investigated psychological interventions: six (66.7%) found significant improvement, three (33.3%) found no significant difference. Five (13.9%) investigated nutritional interventions, finding no significant difference in three (60%), and significant improvement in two (40%).

CONCLUSIONS

Prehabilitation interventions showed mixed levels of effectiveness, and there is insufficient RCT evidence to suggest system-level delivery across General Surgery within standardized protocols. However, given potential benefits and non-inferiority to standard care, they should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

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.

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Inadequate study reporting precludes interpretation of findings, pooling of results in meta-analyses, and delays knowledge translation. While prehabilitation interventions aim to enhance candidacy for surgery, to our knowledge, a review of the quality of reporting in prehabilitation has yet to be conducted. Our objective was to determine the extent to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prehabilitation are reported according to methodological and intervention reporting checklists.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria: RCTs of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

search was conducted in March 2022 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane.

CHARTING METHODS

identified studies were compared to CONSORT, CERT & Modified CERT, TIDieR, PRESENT, and CONSORT-SPI. An agreement ratio (AR) was defined to evaluate if applicable guideline items were correctly reported. Data were analyzed as frequency (n, %) and mean with standard deviation (SD).

RESULTS

We identified 935 unique articles and included 70 trials published from 1994 to 2022. Most prehabilitation programs comprised exercise-only interventions (n = 40, 57%) and were applied before oncologic surgery (n = 32, 46%). The overall mean AR was 57% (SD: 20.9%). The specific mean ARs were as follows: CONSORT: 71% (SD: 16.3%); TIDieR: 62% (SD:17.7%); CERT: 54% (SD: 16.6%); Modified-CERT: 40% (SD:17.8%); PRESENT: 78% (SD: 8.9); and CONSORT-SPI: 47% (SD: 22.1).

CONCLUSION

Altogether, existing prehabilitation trials report approximately half of the checklist items recommended by methodological and intervention reporting guidelines. Reporting practices may improve with the development of a reporting checklist specific to prehabilitation interventions.

Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the UK. Treatment outcomes are poor and UK deaths from lung cancer are higher than any other cancer. Prehabilitation has shown to be an important means of preparing patients both physically and psychologically for cancer treatment. However, little is understood about the context and mechanisms of prehabilitation that can impact physiological and psychological wellbeing. Our aim was to review and summarise primary research on prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway using a realist approach.

METHODS

A scoping review of empirical primary research was conducted. Five online medical databases from 2016 - February 2023 were searched. All articles reporting on prehabilitation in lung cancer were included in the review. For this review, prehabilitation was defined as either a uni-modal or multi-modal intervention including exercise, nutrition and/or psychosocial support within a home, community or hospital based setting. A realist framework of context, mechanism and outcome was used to assist with the interpretation of findings.

RESULTS

In total, 31 studies were included in the review, of which, three were published study protocols. Over 95% of studies featured an exercise component as part of a prehabilitation programme. Twenty-six of the studies had a surgical focus. Only two studies reported using theory to underpin the design of this complex intervention. There was large heterogeneity across all studies as well as a lack of clinical trials to provide definitive evidence on the programme design, setting, type of intervention, patient criteria, delivery, duration and outcome measures used.

CONCLUSION

A standardised prehabilitation programme for lung cancer patients does not yet exist. Future lung cancer prehabilitation programmes should take into account patient led values, needs, goals, support structures and beliefs, as these factors can affect the delivery and engagement of interventions. Future research should consider using a conceptual framework to conceptualise the living with and beyond cancer experience to help shape and inform personalised prehabilitation services.

Is personalised prehabilitation feasible to implement for patients undergoing oncological treatment for lung cancer at a London teaching hospital? Protocol of a feasibility trial

INTRODUCTION

There is significant potential to improve outcomes for patients with lung cancer in terms of quality of life and survival. There is some evidence that prehabilitation can help, but, to date, this has only been tested in surgical populations, despite 70%-80% of patients with lung cancer in the UK receiving non-surgical treatment. The physiological and psychological benefits of prehabilitation seen in surgical patients could be extrapolated to those receiving non-surgical treatment, particularly in such a poor prognosis group. With patients and healthcare professionals, we have co-designed a personalised and evidence-based prehabilitation programme. This draws on a conceptual framework that aligns with patient values and needs as well as functional goals. We aim to investigate whether this programme is feasible to implement and evaluate in clinical practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

An open-label, single-group feasibility study incorporating quantitative assessments, a qualitative free text questionnaire and reflective field notes. Thirty participants will be recruited over an eight-month period from a single London teaching hospital. All recruited participants will receive a personalised prehabilitation programme during their oncological treatment. This includes a one-hour face-to-face appointment prior to, at week three and at week six of their treatment regimen as well as a weekly telephone call. Interventions including nutrition, physical activity and psychological well-being are stratified according to a patient's priorities, level of readiness and expressed needs. The primary outcome will be feasibility of the personalised prehabilitation programme in clinical practice by investigating areas of uncertainty regarding patient recruitment, attrition, treatment fidelity, intervention adherence and acceptability of study outcome measures. Secondary outcomes will include quality of life, functional capacity and grip strength.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 22/PR/0390). Results of this study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences and in collaboration with patient and public involvement representatives.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05318807.

The effect of preoperative behaviour change interventions on pre- and post-surgery health behaviours, health outcomes, and health inequalities in adults: A systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation interventions are being delivered across surgical specialities to improve health risk behaviours leading to better surgical outcomes and potentially reduce length of hospital stay. Most previous research has focused on specific surgery specialities and has not considered the impact of interventions on health inequalities, nor whether prehabilitation improves health behaviour risk profiles beyond surgery. The aim of this review was to examine behavioural Prehabilitation interventions across surgeries to inform policy makers and commissioners of the best available evidence.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effect of behavioural prehabilitation interventions targeting at least one of: smoking behaviour, alcohol use, physical activity, dietary intake (including weight loss interventions) on pre- and post-surgery health behaviours, health outcomes, and health inequalities. The comparator was usual care or no treatment. MEDLINE, PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Clinical trials and Embase databases were searched from inception to May 2021, and the MEDLINE search was updated twice, most recently in March 2023. Two reviewers independently identified eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Outcomes were length of stay, six-minute walk test, behaviours (smoking, diet, physical activity, weight change, and alcohol), and quality of life. Sixty-seven trials were included; 49 interventions targeted a single behaviour and 18 targeted multiple behaviours. No trials examined effects by equality measures. Length of stay in the intervention group was 1.5 days shorter than the comparator (n = 9 trials, 95% CI -2.6 to -0.4, p = 0.01, I2 83%), although in sensitivity analysis prehabilitation had the most impact in lung cancer patients (-3.5 days). Pre-surgery, there was a mean difference of 31.8 m in the six-minute walk test favouring the prehabilitation group (n = 19 trials, 95% CI 21.2 to 42.4m, I2 55%, P <0.001) and this was sustained to 4-weeks post-surgery (n = 9 trials, mean difference = 34.4m (95%CI 12.8 to 56.0, I2 72%, P = 0.002)). Smoking cessation was greater in the prehabilitation group before surgery (RR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7 to 4.8, I2 84%), and this was sustained at 12 months post-surgery (RR 1.74 (95% CI 1.20 to 2.55, I2 43%, Tau2 0.09, p = 0.004)There was no difference in pre-surgery quality of life (n = 12 trials) or BMI (n = 4 trials).

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural prehabilitation interventions reduced length of stay by 1.5 days, although in sensitivity analysis the difference was only found for Prehabilitation interventions for lung cancer. Prehabilitation can improve functional capacity and smoking outcomes just before surgery. That improvements in smoking outcomes were sustained at 12-months post-surgery suggests that the surgical encounter holds promise as a teachable moment for longer-term behavioural change. Given the paucity of data on the effects on other behavioural risk factors, more research grounded in behavioural science and with longer-term follow-up is needed to further investigate this potential.

A preoperative ultrasound-based protocol for optimisation of fluid therapy to prevent early intraoperative hypotension: a randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative hypotension is a risk factor for postoperative complications. Preoperative dehydration is a major contributor, although it is difficult to estimate its severity. Point-of-care ultrasound offers several potential methods, including measurements of the inferior vena cava. The addition of lung ultrasound may offer a safety limit. We aimed to evaluate whether the implication of an ultrasound-based preoperative fluid therapy protocol can decrease the incidence of early intraoperative hypotension.

METHODS

Randomised controlled study in a tertiary university department involves elective surgical patients of ASA 2-3 class, scheduled for elective major abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia with intubation. We randomised 40-40 patients; 38-38 were available for analysis. Conventional fluid therapy was ordered on routine preoperative visits. Ultrasound-based protocol evaluated the collapsibility index of inferior vena cava and lung ultrasound profiles. Scans were performed twice: 2 h and 30 min before surgery. A high collapsibility index (≥ 40%) indicated a standardised fluid bolus, while the anterior B-profile of the lung ultrasound contraindicated further fluid. The primary outcome was the incidence of postinduction and early intraoperative (0-10 min) hypotension (MAP < 65 mmHg and/or ≥ 30% of decrease from baseline). Secondary endpoints were postoperative lactate level, urine output and lung ultrasound score at 24 h.

RESULTS

The absolute criterion of postinduction hypotension was fulfilled in 12 patients in the conventional group (31.6%) and 3 in the ultrasound-based group (7.9%) (p = 0.0246). Based on composite criteria of absolute and/or relative hypotension, we observed 17 (44.7%) and 7 (18.4%) cases, respectively (p = 0.0136). The incidence of early intraoperative hypotension was also lower: HR for absolute hypotension was 2.10 (95% CI 1.00-4.42) in the conventional group (p = 0.0387). Secondary outcome measures were similar in the study groups.

CONCLUSION

We implemented a safe and effective point-of-care ultrasound-based preoperative fluid replacement protocol into perioperative care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered to ClinicalTrials.gov on 10/12/2021, registration number: NCT05171608 (registered prospectively on 10/12/2021).

A toolbox for a structured risk-based prehabilitation program in major surgical oncology

Prehabilitation is a multimodal concept to improve functional capability prior to surgery, so that the patients' resilience is strengthened to withstand any peri- and postoperative comorbidity. It covers physical activities, nutrition, and psychosocial wellbeing. The literature is heterogeneous in outcomes and definitions. In this scoping review, class 1 and 2 evidence was included to identify seven main aspects of prehabilitation for the treatment pathway: (i) risk assessment, (ii) FITT (frequency, interventions, time, type of exercise) principles of prehabilitation exercise, (iii) outcome measures, (iv) nutrition, (v) patient blood management, (vi) mental wellbeing, and (vii) economic potential. Recommendations include the risk of tumor progression due to delay of surgery. Patients undergoing prehabilitation should perceive risk assessment by structured, quantifiable, and validated tools like Risk Analysis Index, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), American Society of Anesthesiology Score, or Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group scoring. Assessments should be repeated to quantify its effects. The most common types of exercise include breathing exercises and moderate- to high-intensity interval protocols. The program should have a duration of 3-6 weeks with 3-4 exercises per week that take 30-60 min. The 6-Minute Walking Testing is a valid and resource-saving tool to assess changes in aerobic capacity. Long-term assessment should include standardized outcome measurements (overall survival, 90-day survival, Dindo-Clavien/CCI®) to monitor the potential of up to 50% less morbidity. Finally, individual cost-revenue assessment can help assess health economics, confirming the hypothetic saving of $8 for treatment for $1 spent for prehabilitation. These recommendations should serve as a toolbox to generate hypotheses, discussion, and systematic approaches to develop clinical prehabilitation standards.

Cardiovascular risk management in the peri-operative setting

Peri-operative cardiovascular events occur in up to 3% of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Accurate cardiovascular risk assessment is important in the peri-operative setting, as it allows informed and shared decisions regarding the appropriateness of proceeding with surgery, guides surgical and anaesthetic approaches, and may influence the use of preventive medications and post-operative cardiac monitoring. Quantitative risk assessment may also inform a reconsideration of choosing a more limited lower risk type of surgery, or conservative management. Pre-operative cardiovascular risk assessment starts with clinical assessment and should include an estimate of functional capacity. Specialised cardiac investigations are rarely indicated specifically to assess pre-operative cardiovascular risk. The decision regarding cardiac investigations is influenced by the nature, extent and urgency of surgery. The strategy of performing pre-operative revascularisation to improve post-operative outcomes is not evidence-based and recent international guidelines recommend against this.

Efficacy of supervised exercise prehabilitation programs to improve major abdominal surgery outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The optimal package of components for a prehabilitation intervention remains unclear. The aim was to determine the efficacy of supervised exercise prehabilitation programs to enhance patient fitness and improve surgical outcomes. The protocol was preregistered (PROSPERO: CRD42020180693). PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, CENTRAL, PeDro, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of supervised prehabilitation programs before major abdominal surgery were included. Physical function, cardiorespiratory capacity and surgical outcomes were the primary outcomes measures. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias 1.0 tool for RCTs. Data are summarized narratively, and where possible, quantitavely. Meta-analyses results are reported as risk ratios (RR), mean difference of changes between baseline and follow-up time points or mean difference between groups and 95% confidence interval (CI). Twenty RCTs were included in the analysis with a total of 1258 patients. The average 6-min walking distance change was +33 m in the prehabilitation group compared to the usual care (UC) group after prehabilitation (95% CI: [13, 53], P < 0.01). Only in studies with more than one supervised session per week changes in 6-min-walk distance were significantly higher in the prehabilitation group compared to the UC group after prehabiliatation (Mean difference: 47 m, 95% [CI]: [20-75], P < 0.01). The change in peak volume of oxygen uptake during a maximum cardiopulmonary test was +1.47 mL·kg^-1·min^-1 in the prehabilitation group compared to the UC group (95% CI: [0.68, 2.25], P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the change in oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold between groups (Mean differences: 0.47, 95% CI: [-0.16, 1.10], P:0.14). Post-operative complications incidence was similar between groups (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: [0.61, 1.05], P:0.11), irrespective of the frequency of supervised session per week (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: [0.43, 1.03], P:0.07). In conclusion, prehabilitation programmes with more than one supervised session per week improved physical function but did not enhance surgical outcomes.

Prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation to improve functional capacity, reduce postoperative complications and improve quality of life in colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the cornerstone in curative treatment of colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, surgery itself can adversely affect patient health. 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' programmes, which include multimodal interventions, have improved patient outcomes substantially. However, these are mainly applied peri- and postoperatively. Multimodal prehabilitation includes multiple preoperative interventions to prepare patients for surgery with the aim of increasing resilience, thereby improving postoperative outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of multimodal prehabilitation programmes on functional capacity, postoperative complications, and quality of life in adult patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO in January 2021. We also searched trial registries up to March 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for surgery, comparing multimodal prehabilitation programmes (defined as comprising at least two preoperative interventions) with no prehabilitation. We focused on the following outcomes: functional capacity (i.e. 6-minute walk test, VO2peak, handgrip strength), postoperative outcomes (i.e. complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, emergency department visits, re-admissions), health-related quality of life, compliance, safety of prehabilitation, and return to normal activities.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Any disagreements were solved with discussion and consensus. We pooled data to perform meta-analyses, where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three RCTs that enrolled 250 participants with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for elective (mainly laparoscopic) surgery. Included trials were conducted in tertiary care centres and recruited patients during periods ranging from 17 months to 45 months. A total of 130 participants enrolled in a preoperative four-week trimodal prehabilitation programme consisting of exercise, nutritional intervention, and anxiety reduction techniques. Outcomes of these participants were compared to those of 120 participants who started an identical but postoperative programme. Postoperatively, prehabilitation may improve functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test at four and eight weeks (mean difference (MD) 26.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.81 to 65.85; 2 studies; n = 131; and MD 26.58, 95% CI -8.88 to 62.04; 2 studies; n = 140); however, the certainty of evidence is low and very low, respectively, due to serious risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. After prehabilitation, the functional capacity before surgery improved, with a clinically relevant mean difference of 24.91 metres (95% CI 11.24 to 38.57; 3 studies; n = 225). The certainty of evidence was moderate due to downgrading for serious risk of bias. The effects of prehabilitation on the number of complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.29; 3 studies; n = 250), emergency department visits (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.32; 3 studies; n = 250) and re-admissions (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.65; 3 studies; n = 250) were small or even trivial. The certainty of evidence was low due to downgrading for serious risk of bias and imprecision. The effects on VO2peak, handgrip strength, length of hospital stay, mortality rate, health-related quality of life, return to normal activities, safety of the programme, and compliance rate could not be analysed quantitatively due to missing or insufficient data. The included studies did not report a difference between groups for health-related quality of life and length of hospital stay. Data on remaining outcomes were not reported or were reported inadequately in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prehabilitation may result in an improved functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test both preoperatively and postoperatively. A solid effect on the number of omplications, postoperative emergency department visits and re-admissions could not be established. The certainty of evidence ranges from moderate to very low, due to downgrading for serious risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. In addition, only three heterogeneous studies were included in this review. Therefore, the findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. Numerous relevant RCTs are ongoing and will be included in a future update of this review.

Application and practice of trimodal prehabilitation model in preoperative management of patients with lung cancer undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Lung cancer is one of the malignant tumors with high mortality worldwide. To date, the most effective treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still surgical resection. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery has become the main surgical approach. Tumor patients are the high-risk perioperative population. At present, how to optimize perioperative management measures to improve the patient's body function and promote the rehabilitation after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is a hot research topic for medical staff. In this study, 148 patients with lung cancer were selected as the research object, to analyze and discuss the application value of trimodal prehabilitation model in preoperative management of patients with lung cancer undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

The Role and Effect of Multimodal Prehabilitation Before Major Abdominal Surgery: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

For patients undergoing abdominal surgery, multimodal prehabilitation, including nutrition and exercise interventions, aims to optimize their preoperative physical and physiological capacity. This meta-analysis aims to explore the impact of multimodal prehabilitation on surgical and functional outcomes of abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Medline, Embase and CENTRAL were searched for articles about multimodal prehabilitation in major abdominal surgery. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo score ≥3, and functional outcomes, measured by the 6-Minute Walking Test (6MWT). Secondary outcome measures included the quality-of-life measures. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated, with DerSimonian and Laird random effects used to account for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included, analysing 4,210 patients across 13 trials and 12 observational studies. Patients undergoing prehabilitation had significantly fewer overall complications (RR = 0.879, 95% CI 0.781-0.989, p = 0.034). There were no significant differences in the rates of wound infection, anastomotic leak and duration of hospitalization. The 6MWT improved preoperatively in patients undergoing prehabilitation (SMD = 33.174, 95% CI 12.674-53.673, p = 0.005), but there were no significant differences in the 6MWT at 4 weeks (SMD = 30.342, 95% CI - 2.707-63.391, p = 0.066) and 8 weeks (SMD = 24.563, 95% CI - 6.77-55.900, p = 0.104) postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

As preoperative patient optimization shifts towards an interdisciplinary approach, evidence from this meta-analysis shows that multimodal prehabilitation improves the preoperative functional capacity and reduces postoperative complication rates, suggesting its potential in effectively optimizing the abdominal surgery patient. However, there is a large degree of heterogenicity between the prehabilitation interventions between included articles; hence results should be interpreted with caution.

Clinical practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) are dedicated to ensuring high-quality innovative patient care for surgical patients by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus as well as minimally invasive surgery. The ASCRS and SAGES society members involved in the creation of these guidelines were chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery and enhanced recovery. This consensus document was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus and develop clinical practice guidelines based on the best available evidence. While not proscriptive, these guidelines provide information on which decisions can be made and do not dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, healthcare workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. These guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient. This clinical practice guideline represents a collaborative effort between the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and was approved by both societies.

Improved Postoperative Outcomes after Prehabilitation for Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Older Patients: An Emulated Target Trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a multimodal prehabilitation program on perioperative outcomes in colorectal cancer patients with a higher postoperative complication risk, using an emulated target trial (ETT) design.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An ETT design including overlap weighting based on propensity score was performed. The study consisted of all patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (2016-2021), in a large nonacademic training hospital, who were candidate to elective colorectal cancer surgery and had a higher risk for postoperative complications defined by: age ≥ 65 years and or American Society of Anesthesiologists score III/IV. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of prehabilitation compared with usual care on perioperative complications and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-one patients were included: 128 in the usual care group and 123 patients in the prehabilitation group. In the ITT analysis, the number needed to treat to reduce one or more complications in one person was 4.2 (95% CI 2.6-10). Compared with patients in the usual care group, patients undergoing prehabilitation had a 55% lower comprehensive complication score (95% CI -71 to -32%). There was a 33% reduction (95% CI -44 to -18%) in LOS from 7 to 5 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed a clinically relevant reduction of complications and LOS after multimodal prehabilitation in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery with a higher postoperative complication risk. The study methodology used may serve as an example for further larger multicenter comparative effectiveness research on prehabilitation.

Prehabilitation: high-quality evidence is still required

Prehabilitation comprises multidisciplinary healthcare interventions, including exercise, nutritional optimisation, and psychological preparation, which aim to dampen the metabolic response to surgery, shorten the period of recovery, reduce complications, and improve the quality of recovery and quality of life. This editorial evaluates the potential benefits and limitations of and barriers to prehabilitation in surgical patients. The results of several randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses on prehabilitation show differing results, and the strength of the evidence is relatively weak. Heterogeneity in patient populations, interventions, and outcome measures, with a wide range for compliance, contribute to this variation. Evidence could be strengthened by the conduct of large-scale, appropriately powered multicentre trials that have unequivocal clinically relevant and patient-centric endpoints. Studies on prehabilitation should concentrate on recruiting patients who are frail and at high risk. Interventions should be multimodal and exercise regimens should be tailored to each patient's ability with longitudinal measurements of impact.

Physical prehabilitation improves the postoperative outcome of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy in experimental model

Aiming to improve the postoperative outcome of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS), the effect of physical prehabilitation (PP) was investigated in experimental model. Male Wistar rats (n = 106) divided to PP and sedentary (S) groups underwent ALPPS. Changes in liver weight, Ki67 index and liver volume by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were evaluated. Liver function was assessed by laboratory parameters and ^99mTc-mebrofenin single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS). Utilizing endotoxemia model mortality and septic parameters were investigated. Liver mass (p < 0.001), Ki67 index (p < 0.001) and MRI liver volume (p < 0.05) increased in the PP group compared to the S group. Both standard laboratory parameters (p < 0.001) and HBS (p < 0.05) showed enhanced liver function in the PP group compared to the S group. The vulnerability of animals improved in the PP group, as mortality decreased (p < 0.001), while septic laboratory parameters improved (p < 0.05) compared to the S group in the endotoxemia model. Our study demonstrated for the first time the beneficial role of PP on not only volumetric but also functional liver regeneration and postoperative vulnerability after ALLPS.

Multidisciplinary Prehabilitation and Postoperative Rehabilitation for Avoiding Complications in Patients Undergoing Resection of Colon Cancer: Rationale, Design, and Methodology of the ONCOFIT Study

ONCOFIT is a randomized clinical trial with a two-arm parallel design aimed at determining the influence of a multidisciplinary Prehabilitation and Postoperative Program (PPP) on post-surgery complications in patients undergoing resection of colon cancer. This intervention will include supervised physical exercise, dietary behavior change, and psychological support comparing its influence to the standard care. Primary and secondary endpoints will be assessed at baseline, at preoperative conditions, at the end of the PPP intervention (after 12 weeks) and 1-year post-surgery, and will include: post-surgery complications (primary endpoint); prolonged hospital length of stay; readmissions and emergency department call within 1-year after surgery; functional capacity; patient reported outcome measures targeted; anthropometry and body composition; clinical/tumor parameters; physical activity levels and sedentariness; dietary habits; other unhealthy habits; sleep quality; and fecal microbiota diversity and composition. Considering the feasibility of the present intervention in a real-life scenario, ONCOFIT will contribute to the standardization of a cost-effective strategy for preventing and improving health-related consequences in patients undergoing resection of colon cancer with an important clinical and economic impact, not only in the scientific community, but also in clinical practice.

New guidelines for the perioperative care of people living with frailty undergoing elective and emergency surgery-a commentary

Frailty is common in the older population and is a predictor of adverse outcomes following emergency and elective surgery. Identification of frailty is key to enable targeted intervention throughout the perioperative pathway from contemplation of surgery to recovery. Despite evidence on how to identify and modify frailty, such interventions are not yet routine perioperative care. To address this implementation gap, a guideline was published in 2021 by the Centre for Perioperative Care and the British Geriatrics Society, working with patient representatives and all stakeholders involved in the perioperative care of patients with frailty undergoing surgery. The guideline covers all aspects of perioperative care relevant to adults living with frailty undergoing elective and emergency surgery. It is written for healthcare professionals, as well as for patients and their carers, managers and commissioners. Implementation of the guideline will require collaboration between all stakeholders, underpinned by an implementation strategy, workforce development with supporting education and training resources, and evaluation through national audit and research. The guideline is an important step in improving perioperative outcomes for people living with frailty and quality of healthcare services. This commentary provides a summary and discussion of the evidence informing the standards and recommendations in the published guideline.

Cancer Prehabilitation in Practice: the Current Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article serves to describe recent controversies in cancer prehabilitation including efficacy, dose, cost effectiveness, stakeholder input, and international implementation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Appropriate frequency, type, and timing have yet to be determined, but high intensity exercise is recommended. Costs are favorable when modeled and information on costs of real-world application are forthcoming. Patients are interested in and willing to attend cancer prehabilitation. Cancer prehabilitation research is spreading throughout the world. Cancer prehabilitation includes assessment of a newly diagnosed cancer patient's baseline fitness and targeted interventions to improve their health before surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. Cancer prehabilitation improves fitness as measured preoperatively and improves outcomes postoperatively.

The effect of prehabilitation on the postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Study objective

Prehabilitation is analogous to marathon training and includes preoperative preparation for exercise, as well as nutrition and psychology. However, evidence-based recommendations to guide prehabilitation before colorectal surgery are limited. We aimed to evaluate the effect of prehabilitation on the postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

Design

This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies reporting the effect of prehabilitation strategies versus standard care or rehabilitation in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. The primary outcomes were overall postoperative complications and length of hospital stay (LOS), and the secondary outcome was functional capacity (measured using the 6-min walk test [6MWT]) at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery.

Main results

Fifteen studies with 1,306 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed no significant reduction in the number of overall postoperative complications (risk ratio = 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79–1.31; p = 0.878) or LOS (standardized mean difference = 0.04; 95% CI = −0.11 to 0.20; p = 0.589) in patients who underwent colorectal surgery with or without prehabilitation strategy. Additionally, there were no significant differences in the functional capacity estimated using the 6MWT at 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively.

Conclusions

Prehabilitation did not significantly affect the number of postoperative complications, LOS, or functional capacity of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Whether prehabilitation should be recommended deserves further consideration.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=290108, identifier CRD42021290108

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

Implementation of prehabilitation in colorectal cancer surgery: qualitative research on how to strengthen facilitators and overcome barriers

Purpose

Prehabilitation is increasingly offered to patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing surgery as it could prevent complications and facilitate recovery. However, implementation of such a complex multidisciplinary intervention is challenging. This study aims to explore perspectives of professionals involved in prehabilitation to gain understanding of barriers or facilitators to its implementation and to identify strategies to successful operationalization of prehabilitation.

Methods

In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were performed with healthcare professionals involved in prehabilitation for patients with CRC. Prehabilitation was defined as a preoperative program with the aim of improving physical fitness and nutritional status. Parallel with data collection, open coding was applied to the transcribed interviews. The Ottawa Model of Research Use (OMRU) framework, a comprehensive interdisciplinary model guide to promote implementation of research findings into healthcare practice, was used to categorize obtained codes and structure the barriers and facilitators into relevant themes for change.

Results

Thirteen interviews were conducted. Important barriers were the conflicting scientific evidence on (cost-)effectiveness of prehabilitation, the current inability to offer a personalized prehabilitation program, the complex logistic organization of the program, and the unawareness of (the importance of) a prehabilitation program among healthcare professionals and patients. Relevant facilitators were availability of program coordinators, availability of physician leadership, and involving skeptical colleagues in the implementation process from the start.

Conclusions

Important barriers to prehabilitation implementation are mainly related to the intervention being complex, relatively unknown and only evaluated in a research setting. Therefore, physicians’ leadership is needed to transform care towards more integration of personalized prehabilitation programs.

Implications for cancer survivors

By strengthening prehabilitation programs and evidence of their efficacy using these recommendations, it should be possible to enhance both the pre- and postoperative quality of life for colorectal cancer patients during survivorship.

Prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation to improve functional capacity, reduce postoperative complications and improve quality of life in colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the cornerstone in curative treatment of colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, surgery itself can adversely affect patient health. 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' programmes, which include multimodal interventions, have improved patient outcomes substantially. However, these are mainly applied peri- and postoperatively. Multimodal prehabilitation includes multiple preoperative interventions to prepare patients for surgery with the aim of increasing resilience, thereby improving postoperative outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of multimodal prehabilitation programmes on functional capacity, postoperative complications, and quality of life in adult patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO in January 2021. We also searched trial registries up to March 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for surgery, comparing multimodal prehabilitation programmes (defined as comprising at least two preoperative interventions) with no prehabilitation. We focused on the following outcomes: functional capacity (i.e. 6-minute walk test, VO2peak, handgrip strength), postoperative outcomes (i.e. complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, emergency department visits, re-admissions), health-related quality of life, compliance, safety of prehabilitation, and return to normal activities.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Any disagreements were solved with discussion and consensus. We pooled data to perform meta-analyses, where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three RCTs that enrolled 250 participants with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for elective (mainly laparoscopic) surgery. Included trials were conducted in tertiary care centres and recruited patients during periods ranging from 17 months to 45 months. A total of 130 participants enrolled in a preoperative four-week trimodal prehabilitation programme consisting of exercise, nutritional intervention, and anxiety reduction techniques. Outcomes of these participants were compared to those of 120 participants who started an identical but postoperative programme. Postoperatively, prehabilitation may improve functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test at four and eight weeks (mean difference (MD) 26.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.81 to 65.85; 2 studies; n = 131; and MD 26.58, 95% CI -8.88 to 62.04; 2 studies; n = 140); however, the certainty of evidence is low and very low, respectively, due to serious risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. After prehabilitation, the functional capacity before surgery improved, with a clinically relevant mean difference of 24.91 metres (95% CI 11.24 to 38.57; 3 studies; n = 225). The certainty of evidence was moderate due to downgrading for serious risk of bias. Prehabilitation may also result in fewer complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.29; 3 studies; n = 250) and fewer emergency department visits (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.32; 3 studies; n = 250). The certainty of evidence was low due to downgrading for serious risk of bias and imprecision. On the other hand, prehabilitation may also result in a higher re-admission rate (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.65; 3 studies; n = 250). The certainty of evidence was again low due to downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision. The effect on VO2peak, handgrip strength, length of hospital stay, mortality rate, health-related quality of life, return to normal activities, safety of the programme, and compliance rate could not be analysed quantitatively due to missing or insufficient data. The included studies did not report a difference between groups for health-related quality of life and length of hospital stay. Data on remaining outcomes were not reported or were reported inadequately in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prehabilitation may result in an improved functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test both preoperatively and postoperatively. Complication rates and the number of emergency department visits postoperatively may also diminish due to a prehabilitation programme, while the number of re-admissions may be higher in the prehabilitation group. The certainty of evidence ranges from moderate to very low, due to downgrading for serious risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. In addition, only three heterogeneous studies were included in this review. Therefore, the findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. Numerous relevant RCTs are ongoing and will be included in a future update of this review.

Surgery as an Emotional Strain: An Observational Study in Patients Undergoing Elective Colorectal Surgery

Recent research suggests an impact of psychological distress on postoperative outcomes in orthopedic and neurosurgery. It is widely unknown whether patients' mood might affect the postoperative outcome and complication rate in colorectal surgery. Over a period of 22 months, a monocentric, observational study among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery without the creation of an ostomy was conducted. Patients were asked to fill in a standardized multi-dimensional mood questionnaire (MDMQ) preoperatively as well as on the third, sixth, and ninth postoperative days to assess mood, wakefulness, and arousal. The results of 80 patients (51% male, mean age 59 years) were analyzed. Almost half of the patients (58%) developed postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (Grade I 14%, Grade II 30%, Grade III 9%, Grade IV 3%). Patients' mood increased continually from the preoperative day to the ninth postoperative day. Patients' wakefulness decreased initially (pre- to third postoperative day) and increased again in the further course. Patients' arousal decreased pre- to postoperatively. Neither preoperative mood, nor arousal or wakefulness of patients showed a clear association with the development of postoperative complications. In conclusion, preoperative psychological distress measured by MDMQ did not affect the postoperative complication rate of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

Multimodal prehabilitation in older adults before major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Multimodal prehabilitation aims to prepare frail older patients for major surgery. The objective of this review is to determine the benefits of pre-operative multimodal prehabilitation compared to standard care in older patients.

METHODS

Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsychINFO. They were searched from inception to September 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) with an average study population age ≥ 65 that had undergone major abdominal operation with at least two components (physical, nutritional, psychological) of prehabilitation programs were included.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs were included with a total of 823 patients, of whom 705 completed the study with 358 undergoing prehabilitation and 347 were controls. Significantly lower complications were observed in the prehabilitation group compared to control (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.99; p = 0.04; I² = 32%). A significant increase in 6-min walking distance (6MWD) from baseline to immediately prior to surgery (mean difference 35.1 m; 95%CI 11.6-58.4; p = 0.003; I² = 67%) and 8 weeks post-surgery (mean difference 44.9 m; 95%CI 6.0-83.8; p = 0.02; I² = 75%) was noted in the prehabilitation group. No difference was observed in length of stay (OR 0.59; 95% CI - 0.23 to 1.40; p = 0.16; I² = 91%) or 30-day emergency department visit (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.26; p = 0.25; I² = 0%). Patient reported outcome measures were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Amongst older patients, multimodal prehabilitation increases peri-operative functional capacity and may potentially decrease post-operative complications. Future studies should continue to focus on older patients who are frail as this is the group that prehabilitation would likely have a clinically significant impact on.

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.

Does Preoperative Cognitive Optimization Improve Postoperative Outcomes in the Elderly?

Perioperative neurocognitive disorder (PND) is a growing concern, affecting several million elderly patients each year in the United States, but strategies for its effective prevention have not yet been established. Humeidan et al. recently demonstrated that preoperative brain exercise resulted in a decrease in postoperative delirium incidence in elderly surgical patients, suggesting the potential of presurgical cognitive optimization to improve postoperative cognitive outcomes. This brief review summarizes the current knowledge regarding preoperative cognitive optimization and highlights landmark studies, as well as current ongoing studies, as the field is rapidly growing. This review further discusses the benefit of cognitive training in non-surgical elderly populations and the role of cognitive training in patients with preexisting cognitive impairment or dementia. The review also examines preclinical evidence in support of cognitive training, which can facilitate understanding of brain plasticity and the pathophysiology of PND. The literature suggests positive impacts of presurgical cognitive optimization, but further studies are encouraged to establish effective cognitive training programs for elderly presurgical patients.

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.

The effects of physical prehabilitation: Improved liver regeneration and mitochondrial function after ALPPS operation in a rodent model

BACKGROUND

To identify the role of physical prehabilitation (PP) in liver regeneration, mitochondrial function, biogenesis, and inflammatory response was investigated after associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in a rodent model.

METHODS

Male Wistar rats (n = 60) underwent ALPPS. Animals were divided (n = 30) to the physical prehabilitation group (PP) and sedentary group (S). The animals were exsanguinated before (0 hour) and 24, 48, 72, or 168 hours after the operation. Regeneration rate and proliferation index were assessed. Mitochondrial function, biogenesis, and inflammatory response were evaluated.

RESULTS

Regeneration rate and Ki67 index were significantly increased in the PP group compared to the S group (P < .001). Due to the changes in oxidative capacity and ATP production rate, the P/O ratio of PP group compared to the S group was significantly increased (P < .05). PP group was characterized by accelerated mitochondrial biogenesis and less intense inflammatory response compared to the S group.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of the beneficial effects of PP on liver regeneration, mitochondrial function, biogenesis, and the inflammatory response after ALPPS.

Nursing - a core element of rehabilitation

AIM

2020 was been acknowledged by the World Health Organization as the International Year of the Nurse and the Midwife. On this occasion, the Global Rehabilitation Alliance and the International Council of Nurse would like to conceptually reflect the role of nurses in rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND

Rehabilitation and nursing are strictly ingrained. Rehabilitation aims at improving, reaching and maintaining optimal functioning of persons with disability and persons with health conditions experiencing disability. Nursing is defined as use of clinical judgement in the provision of care to enable people to improve, maintain, or recover health, to cope with health problems, and to achieve the best possible quality of life. Nursing has a crucial role in all phases of rehabilitation care (acute, post-acute and long-term rehabilitation). Nurses deliver rehabilitation in many settings, in nursing homes and community-based rehabilitation. The main principle is not to deliver care for the patient but deliver care with the patient. This includes explaining, demonstrating and practising with the goal to help the patient to (re-)gain independence.

DISCUSSION

Nurses play an important role in delivering rehabilitation and are involved in all aspects of the multidimensional rehabilitation process. One of the important points is that in most settings, nurses are the professionals with a prolonged relationship with patients and families, and may have the best insight into the patients' personal and contextual factors with regard to the rehabilitation process.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING AND/OR HEALTH POLICY

Strengthening nursing in rehabilitation is a vital factor to deliver high-quality rehabilitation and to achieve optimum outcomes. For this reason, we urge all relevant stakeholders at governmental and rehabilitation service provider levels to work towards these goals.