Association of a prehabilitation program with anxiety and depression before colorectal surgery: a post hoc analysis of the pERACS randomized controlled trial

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.

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation aims at enhancing patients' functional capacity and overall health status to enable them to withstand a forthcoming stressor like surgery. Our aim was to synthesise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery compared with usual preoperative care.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the CRD database, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP and the dissertation databases OADT and DART. Studies comparing prehabilitation for patients with elective surgery to usual preoperative care were included if they reported cost outcomes. All types of economic evaluations (EEs) were included. The primary outcome of the review was cost-effectiveness based on cost-utility analyses (CUAs). The risk of bias of trial-based EEs was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and the ROBINS-I tool and the credibility of model-based EEs with the ISPOR checklist. Methodological quality of full EEs was assessed using the CHEC checklist. The EEs' results were synthesised narratively using vote counting based on direction of effect.

RESULTS

We included 45 unique studies: 25 completed EEs and 20 ongoing studies. Of the completed EEs, 22 were trial-based and three model-based, corresponding to four CUAs, three cost-effectiveness analyses, two cost-benefit analyses, 12 cost-consequence analyses and four cost-minimization analyses. Three of the four trial-based CUAs (75%) found prehabilitation cost-effective, i.e. more effective and/or less costly than usual care. Overall, 16/25 (64.0%) EEs found prehabilitation cost-effective. When excluding studies of insufficient credibility/critical risk of bias, this number reduced to 14/23 (60.9%). In 8/25 (32.0%), cost-effectiveness was unclear, e.g. because prehabilitation was more effective and more costly, and in one EE prehabilitation was not cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

We found some evidence that prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery is cost-effective compared to usual preoperative care. However, we suspect a relevant risk of publication bias, and most EEs were of high risk of bias and/or low methodological quality. Furthermore, there was relevant heterogeneity depending on the population, intervention and methods. Future EEs should be performed over a longer time horizon and apply a more comprehensive perspective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020182813.

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.

Effects of exercise by type and duration on quality of life in patients with digestive system cancers: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is scant evidence regarding the effects of exercise type and duration on quality of life (QoL) in digestive system cancer (DSC) survivors. We aim to investigate the optimal type and duration of exercises to improve QoL for DSC survivors through a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed. Eligibility for study inclusion was limited to studies that were randomized controlled trials involving all kinds of exercise in adult patients with DSCs, and the comparator was in standard care or other types of exercise. The primary outcome was QoL, including general health, physical health, mental health, and role function. Secondary outcomes included cancer-related symptoms such as fatigue, insomnia, depression, anxiety, and duration of hospital stay. The network meta-analyses were performed using a random-effect model.

RESULTS

The analysis included 32 eligible articles and a total of 2558 participants. Our primary outcome indicated that short-term aerobic exercise significantly enhanced general health (standardized mean differences (SMDs) = 0.66, 95% credible intervals (CrIs): 0.05 to 1.30, and also contributed to a better mental health (SMD = 0.37, 95%CrI: -0.06 to 0.81 and role function (SMD = 0.48, 95%CrI: -0.27 to 1.20). Although without significant changes, short-term resistance exercise tends to increase the physical health of patients with DSCs (SMD = 0.69, 95%CrI: -0.07 to 1.50) and effective in alleviating fatigue (SMD = -0.77, 95%CrI: -1.50 to 0.01). Short-term aerobic exercise was related to a lower score of insomnia (SMD = -1.20, 95%CrI: -2.40 to 0.06), depression (SMD = -0.51, 95%CrI: -1.50 to 0.45), and anxiety (SMD = -0.45, 95%CrI: -1.30 to 0.34). All types of exercise related to a trend of declined hospital stays (-0.87 to -5.00 days). Long-term resistance exercise, however, was negatively associated with general health (SMD = -0.33, 95%CrI: -1.70 to 1.00), physical health (SMD = -0.18, 95%CrI: -1.30 to 0.90), and role function (SMD = -1.20, 95%CrI: -2.50 to 0.11).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that short-term aerobic exercise, with or without resistance exercise programs, enhances QoL (especially for general health) as well as relieves cancer-related symptoms for DSC survivors, while long-term resistance exercise may have negative effects, and thus should be adopted cautiously. These results provide important evidence for the management of DSCs.

Real-World Implementation of Neurosurgical Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Gliomas in Patients Undergoing Elective Craniotomy

Objective

To design a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for glioma patients undergoing elective craniotomy and evaluate its clinical efficacy and safety after implementation in a tertiary neurosurgical center in China.

Methods

ERAS protocol for glioma patients was developed and modified based on the best available evidence. Patients undergoing elective craniotomy for treatment of glioma between September 2019 to May 2021 were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial comparing a conventional neurosurgical perioperative care (control group) to an ERAS protocol (ERAS group). The primary outcome was postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were 30-day readmission rate, postoperative complications, duration of the drainage tube, time to first oral fluid intake, time to ambulation and functional recovery status.

Results

A total of 151 patients were enrolled (ERAS group: n = 80; control group: n = 71). Compared with the control group, postoperative LOS was significantly shorter in the ERAS group (median: 5 days vs. 7 days, p<0.0001). No 30-day readmission or reoperation occurred in either group. The time of first oral intake, urinary catheter removal within 24 h and early ambulation on postoperative day (POD) 1 were earlier and shorter in the ERAS group compared with the control group (p<0.001). No statistical difference was observed between the two groups in terms of surgical- and nonsurgical-related complications. Functional recovery in terms of Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scores both at discharge and 30-day follow-up was similar in the two groups. Moreover, no significant difference was found between the two groups in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores.

Conclusion

The implementation of the ERAS protocol for glioma patients offers significant benefits over conventional neurosurgical perioperative management, as it is associated with enhancing postoperative recovery, without additional perioperative complications and risks.

Clinical Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=42016), identifier ChiCTR1900025108

Prehabilitation for Older Adults Undergoing Liver Resection: Getting Patients and Surgeons Up to Speed

OBJECTIVES

Morbidity rates following liver resection are high, especially among older adult patients. This review aims to evaluate the evidence surrounding prehabilitation in older patients anticipating liver resection and to describe how prehabilitation may be implemented.

DESIGN

Problem-based narrative review with case-based discussion.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

All older adults anticipating liver resection inclusive of benign and malignant etiologies in the United States.

METHODS

Literature search was performed using MeSH terms and keywords in MEDLINE via PubMed, followed by a manual second search for relevant references within selected articles. Articles were excluded if not available in the English language or did not include patients undergoing hepatectomy.

RESULTS

Prehabilitation includes a range of activities including exercise, nutrition/dietary changes, and psychosocial interventions that may occur from several weeks to days preceding a surgical operation. Older adult patients who participate in prehabilitation may experience improvement in preoperative candidacy as well as improved postoperative quality of life and faster return to baseline; however, evidence supporting a reduction in postoperative length of stay and perioperative morbidity and mortality is conflicting. A variety of modalities are available for prehabilitation but lack consensus and standardization. For a provider desiring to prescribe prehabilitation, multidisciplinary assessments including geriatric, cardiopulmonary, and future remnant liver function can help determine individual patient needs and select appropriate interventions.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

In the older adult patient undergoing liver resection, the current body of literature suggests promising benefits of prehabilitation programs inclusive of functional assessment as well as multimodal interventions. Additional research is needed to determine best practices.