Prehabilitation of overweight and obese patients with dysglycemia awaiting bariatric surgery: Predicting the success of obesity treatment

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

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

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols in Obese Gynecological Oncology Patients: A Single-Center Experience

Objective The aim of this study is to present our experience and evaluate the safety and outcomes of the implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols in obese patients who underwent surgery for suspected or confirmed gynecological malignancies. Method From January 2020 to September 2021, 217 patients underwent laparotomy for a confirmed or suspected gynecological malignancy following a 19-element ERAS pathway. The patients were divided into two groups: obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m², n = 104) and non-obese (BMI < 30, n = 113). Both groups were treated with a 19-element ERAS protocol. Results After dividing the 217 patients into two groups, significantly more comorbidities were observed in the obese group (diabetes mellitus: 23% vs. 8%, p = 0.004; ASA score grade 3: 25.0% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.001), as well as higher rates of endometrial cancer (51.9% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001) compared to the non-obese group. The overall ERAS compliance rates when matched element by element were similar. Postoperatively, complication rates of all grades were significantly higher in the obese group (46.1% vs. 27.4%, p < 0.001) without differences in the length of stay, readmission, and reoperation rates. Conclusion In this retrospective study, we showed that obese gynecological oncology patients can be safely managed with ERAS protocols perioperatively while potentially minimizing the adverse outcomes in these otherwise high-risk patients.