Short-term pre-operative smoking cessation intervention does not affect postoperative complications in colorectal surgery: a randomized clinical trial

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.

Smoking Cessation for Preoperative Optimization

Cigarette smoking is associated with pulmonary and cardiovascular disease and confers increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Smoking cessation in the weeks before surgery can mitigate these risks, and surgeons should screen patients for smoking before a scheduled operation so that appropriate smoking cessation education and resources can be given. Interventions that combine nicotine replacement therapy, pharmacotherapy, and counseling are effective to achieve durable smoking cessation. When trying to stop smoking in the preoperative period, surgical patients experience much higher than average cessation rates compared with the general population, indicating that the time around surgery is ripe for motivating and sustaining behavior change. This chapter summarizes the impact of smoking on postoperative outcomes in abdominal and colorectal surgery, the benefits of smoking cessation, and the impact of interventions aimed to reduce smoking before surgery.

A review of the current ERAS guidelines for liver resection, liver transplantation and pancreatoduodenectomy

In perioperative care after liver resection, transplantation and pancreatoduodenectomy, ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) recommendations are based on the reducing invasiveness of procedures and the severity of the surgical stress, which results in decreasing complications and enhanced recovery. Recommendations for all three operations can be classified into five groups: recommended for all patients, recommended for special patient groups, rejected for all patients, controversial recommendations, specific recommendations for all three operations. Preoperative counselling and psychological support, nutritional support, smoking and alcohol cessation, pre- and intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, thrombosis prevention, limiting of preoperative hunger and thirst to 4 and 6 h, preoperative intaking carbohydrate rich drink, alcohol-based antiseptics for skin preparation, a goal-directed infusion therapy, providing normothermia, early removal of the drainage tube, glycemic control, dual antiemetic therapy, multimodal analgesia strategies, early oral feeding and activation, audit recommend for all patients. Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, enteral and parenteral nutrition, short-acting anxiolytics are recommended for individual patients. It is recommended to avoid Mercedes type incision, use of long-acting anxiolytics and postoperative nasogastric tube. The benefits of preoperative physical exercise, immunonutrition and probiotics are controversial. There are no specific recommendations for thoracic epidural anesthesia, preventing delayed gastric emptying and intestinal paresis in liver surgery.

The effect of preoperative smoking and smoke cessation on wound healing and infection in post-surgery subjects: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the preoperative smoking and smoke cessation on wound healing and infection in post-surgery subjects. A systematic literature search up to January 2022 incorporated 11 trials involving 218 567 subjects after post-surgery at the beginning of the study; 176 670 were smoke cessation or non-smokers, and 41 897 were smokers. Statistical tools like the dichotomous method were used within a random or fixed-influence model to establish the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the influence of preoperative smoking and smoke cessation on wound healing and infection in post-surgery subjects. Smoke cessation or non-smokers had significantly lower postoperative wound healing problems (OR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.82, P < .001), and surgical site wound infection (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.87, P < .001) compared with smokers in post-surgery subjects. Smoke cessation or non-smokers had significantly lower postoperative wound healing problems, and surgical site wound infection compared with smokers in post-surgery subjects. Furthermore, evidence is needed to confirm the outcomes.

Impact of preoperative smoking on patients undergoing right hemicolectomies for colon cancer

Purpose

The tobacco epidemic is one of the biggest global public health issues impacting quality of life and surgical outcomes. Although 30% of colon cancers warrant a right hemicolectomy (RH), there is no specific data on the influence of smoking on postoperative complications following RH for cancer. The aim of this study was to determine its effect on post-surgical outcomes.

Methods

Patients who underwent elective RH for colon cancer between 2016 and 2019 were identified from the ACS-NSQIP database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used with a maximum absolute difference of 0.05 between propensity scores. Primary outcome was to assess the 30-day complication risk profile between smokers and non-smokers. Secondary outcomes included smoking impact on wound and major medico-surgical complication rates, as well as risk of anastomotic leak (AL) using multivariable logistic regression models.

Results

Following PSM, 5652 patients underwent RH for colon cancer with 1,884 (33.3%) identified as smokers. Smokers demonstrated a higher rate of organ space infection (4.1% vs 3.1%, p = 0.034), unplanned return to theatre (4.8% vs 3.7%, p = 0.045) and risk of AL (3.5% vs 2.1%, p = 0.005). Smoking was found to be an independent risk factor for wound complications (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.03–1.71, p = 0.032), primary pulmonary complications (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.06–2.13, p = 0.024) and AL (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.19–2.31, p = 0.003).

Conclusion

Smokers have increased risk of developing major post-operative complications compared to non-smokers. Clinicians and surgeons must inform smokers of these surgical risks and potential benefit of smoking cessation prior to undergoing major colonic resection.

Attitudes towards Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) interventions in colorectal surgery: nationwide survey of Australia and New Zealand colorectal surgeons

BACKGROUND

Whilst Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) has been widely accepted in the international colorectal surgery community, there remains significant variations in ERAS programme implementations, compliance rates and best practice recommendations in international guidelines.

METHODS

A questionnaire was distributed to colorectal surgeons from Australia and New Zealand after ethics approval. It evaluated specialist attitudes towards the effectiveness of specific ERAS interventions in improving short term outcomes after colorectal surgery. The data were analysed using a rating scale and graded response model in item response theory (IRT) on Stata MP, version 15 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

Of 300 colorectal surgeons, 95 (31.7%) participated in the survey. Of eighteen ERAS interventions, this study identified eight strategies as most effective in improving ERAS programmes alongside early oral feeding and mobilisation. These included pre-operative iron infusion for anaemic patients (IRT score = 7.82 [95% CI: 6.01-9.16]), minimally invasive surgery (IRT score = 7.77 [95% CI: 5.96-9.07]), early in-dwelling catheter removal (IRT score = 7.69 [95% CI: 5.83-9.01]), pre-operative smoking cessation (IRT score = 7.68 [95% CI: 5.49-9.18]), pre-operative counselling (IRT score = 7.44 [95% CI: 5.58-8.88]), avoiding drains in colon surgery (IRT score = 7.37 [95% CI: 5.17-8.95]), avoiding nasogastric tubes (IRT score = 7.29 [95% CI: 5.32-8.8]) and early drain removal in rectal surgery (IRT score = 5.64 [95% CI: 3.49-7.66]).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey has demonstrated the current attitudes of colorectal surgeons from Australia and New Zealand regarding ERAS interventions. Eight of the interventions assessed in this study including pre-operative iron infusion for anaemic patients, minimally invasive surgery, early in-dwelling catheter removal, pre-operative smoking cessation, pre-operative counselling, avoidance of drains in colon surgery, avoiding nasogastric tubes and early drain removal in rectal surgery should be considered an important part of colorectal ERAS programmes.

Association of preoperative smoking with complications following major gastrointestinal surgery

BACKGROUND

Understanding modifiable surgical risk factors is essential for preoperative optimization. We evaluated the association between smoking and complications following major gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective colorectal, pancreatic, gastric, or hepatic procedures were identified in the 2017 ACS NSQIP dataset. The primary outcome was 30-day death or serious morbidity (DSM). Secondary outcomes included pulmonary complications, wound complications, and readmission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between smoking and these outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 46,921 patients were identified, of whom 7,671 (16.3%) were smokers. Smoking was associated with DSM (23.2% vs. 20.4%, OR 1.15 [1.08-1.23]), wound complications (13.0% vs. 10.4%, OR 1.24 [1.14-1.34]), pulmonary complications (4.9% vs 2.9%, OR 1.93 [1.70-2.20]), and unplanned readmission (12.6% vs. 11%, OR 1.14 [95% CI 1.06-1.23]).

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking is associated with complications following major gastrointestinal surgery. Patients who smoke should be counseled prior to surgery regarding risks.

Smoking, Obesity, and the Elective Operation

Smoking and obesity are commonly encountered problems in the elective, perioperative setting. This article reviews the risks posed by smoking and diabetes and explores way to mitigate such risks. Other means of perioperative optimization are also discussed in an effort to describe perioperative strategies that can improve patient outcomes.

Smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is one of the leading causes of early death. Varenicline [Champix (UK), Pfizer Europe MA EEIG, Brussels, Belgium; or Chantix (USA), Pfizer Inc., Mission, KS, USA], bupropion (Zyban; GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK) and nicotine replacement therapy are licensed aids for quitting smoking in the UK. Although not licensed, e-cigarettes may also be used in English smoking cessation services. Concerns have been raised about the safety of these medicines and e-cigarettes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes.

DESIGN

Systematic reviews, network meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness analysis informed by the network meta-analysis results.

SETTING

Primary care practices, hospitals, clinics, universities, workplaces, nursing or residential homes.

PARTICIPANTS

Smokers aged ≥ 18 years of all ethnicities using UK-licensed smoking cessation therapies and/or e-cigarettes.

INTERVENTIONS

Varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy as monotherapies and in combination treatments at standard, low or high dose, combination nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarette monotherapies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effectiveness - continuous or sustained abstinence. Safety - serious adverse events, major adverse cardiovascular events and major adverse neuropsychiatric events.

DATA SOURCES

Ten databases, reference lists of relevant research articles and previous reviews. Searches were performed from inception until 16 March 2017 and updated on 19 February 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Three reviewers screened the search results. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by one reviewer and checked by the other reviewers. Network meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and safety outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an amended version of the Benefits of Smoking Cessation on Outcomes model.

RESULTS

Most monotherapies and combination treatments were more effective than placebo at achieving sustained abstinence. Varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard (odds ratio 5.75, 95% credible interval 2.27 to 14.90) was ranked first for sustained abstinence, followed by e-cigarette low (odds ratio 3.22, 95% credible interval 0.97 to 12.60), although these estimates have high uncertainty. We found effect modification for counselling and dependence, with a higher proportion of smokers who received counselling achieving sustained abstinence than those who did not receive counselling, and higher odds of sustained abstinence among participants with higher average dependence scores. We found that bupropion standard increased odds of serious adverse events compared with placebo (odds ratio 1.27, 95% credible interval 1.04 to 1.58). There were no differences between interventions in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events. There was evidence of increased odds of major adverse neuropsychiatric events for smokers randomised to varenicline standard compared with those randomised to bupropion standard (odds ratio 1.43, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 2.09). There was a high level of uncertainty about the most cost-effective intervention, although all were cost-effective compared with nicotine replacement therapy low at the £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold. E-cigarette low appeared to be most cost-effective in the base case, followed by varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When the impact of major adverse neuropsychiatric events was excluded, varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline low plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When limited to licensed interventions in the UK, nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline standard.

LIMITATIONS

Comparisons between active interventions were informed almost exclusively by indirect evidence. Findings were imprecise because of the small numbers of adverse events identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapies of medicines are among the most clinically effective, safe and cost-effective treatment options for smokers. Although the combined therapy of nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline at standard doses was the most effective treatment, this is currently unlicensed for use in the UK.

FUTURE WORK

Researchers should examine the use of these treatments alongside counselling and continue investigating the long-term effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation compared with active interventions such as nicotine replacement therapy.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041302.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Prehabilitation in elective abdominal cancer surgery in older patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation has emerged as a strategy to prepare patients for elective abdominal cancer surgery with documented improvements in postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the evidence for prehabilitation interventions of relevance to the older adult.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and PsychINFO. Studies of preoperative intervention (prehabilitation) in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery reporting postoperative outcomes were included. Age limits were not set as preliminary searches revealed this would be too restrictive. Articles were screened and selected based on PRISMA guidelines, and assessment of bias was performed. Qualitative, quantitative and meta-analyses of data were conducted as appropriate.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies (3962 patients) were included. Interventions included exercise, nutrition, psychological input, comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimization, smoking cessation and multimodal (two or more interventions). Nine studies purposely selected high-risk, frail or older patients. Thirty studies were at moderate or high risk of bias. Ten studies individually reported benefits in complication rates, with meta-analyses for overall complications demonstrating significant benefit: multimodal (risk difference -0·1 (95 per cent c.i. -0·18 to -0·02); P = 0·01, I2  = 18 per cent) and nutrition (risk difference -0·18 (-0·26 to -0·10); P < 0·001, I2  = 0 per cent). Seven studies reported reductions in length of hospital stay, with no differences on meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

The conclusions of this review are limited by the quality of the included studies, and the heterogeneity of interventions and outcome measures reported. Exercise, nutritional and multimodal prehabilitation may reduce morbidity after abdominal surgery, but data specific to older patients are sparse.

Perioperative complications of abdominal surgery in smokers

Purpose

This study examined the association between smoking and perioperative complications of laparoscopic abdominal surgery and whether these complications were reduced with ≥ 4 weeks of preoperative smoking cessation.

Methods

A total of 555 patients who underwent gastric and colorectal cancer surgeries under general anesthesia were divided into the following groups retrospectively: 290 individuals without smoking history (NS group), 144 previous smokers (stopped smoking more than 8 weeks before surgery, PS group), and 121 current smokers (CS group) divided to two groups according to preoperative smoking cessation for < 4 (CS1, n = 76) and 4–8 weeks (CS2, n = 45).

Results

When compared with the NS group, postoperative hospitalization duration was significantly longer in the CS1 group (p < 0.01), whereas differences between the CS2 or PS groups and NS group were not significant. The total number of postoperative complications was higher in all groups of smoking than in NS group, independent on preoperative smoking cessation; however, suture failure was significantly more frequent only in CS1 group. Although pack-years did not significantly affect complication rates in smokers, duration of smoking cessation time in PS group was a negative predictor of postoperative complications.

Conclusion

Providing more than 4 weeks of smoking cessation before gastrointestinal surgery can reduce the duration of hospitalization and rate of suture failure.

Can Nicotine Replacement Therapy Decrease Complications in Plastic Surgery?

Cigarette smoking has been well demonstrated to be associated with adverse outcomes and increased complications in surgical patients in the operative and postoperative periods. There is general agreement that smoking cessation decreases such risks; however, much debate still exists regarding the most effective modalities for risk mitigation, especially concerning modalities involving nicotine replacement in some form. This article reviews the discussion regarding smoking cessation therapies, in particular those involving nicotine replacement, in the context of mitigating risk in plastic surgery procedures. The recent rise in popularity of electronic cigarettes poses further challenges for clinicians in minimizing risk and optimizing outcomes for patients. Prospective studies including high-level evidence such as randomized controlled clinical trials will be required to help plastic surgeons develop guidelines that will enable optimization of patient safety and clinical outcomes.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation increase the likelihood of achieving abstinence in a quit attempt. It is plausible that providing support, or, if support is offered, offering more intensive support or support including particular components may increase abstinence further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of adding or increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition. We also looked at studies which directly compare behavioural interventions matched for contact time, where pharmacotherapy is provided to both groups (e.g. tests of different components or approaches to behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in June 2018 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount or type of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact (defined as face-to-face or telephone). The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, a different type of personal contact, written information, or no behavioural support at all. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women and trials which did not set out to assess smoking cessation at six months or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates, if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-three studies, 36 of which were new to this update, met the inclusion criteria, representing 29,536 participants. Overall, we judged 16 studies to be at low risk of bias and 21 studies to be at high risk of bias. All other studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. We pooled all studies comparing more versus less support in the main analysis. Findings demonstrated a benefit of behavioural support in addition to pharmacotherapy. When all studies of additional behavioural therapy were pooled, there was evidence of a statistically significant benefit from additional support (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22, I² = 8%, 65 studies, n = 23,331) for abstinence at longest follow-up, and this effect was not different when we compared subgroups by type of pharmacotherapy or intensity of contact. This effect was similar in the subgroup of eight studies in which the control group received no behavioural support (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43, I² = 20%, n = 4,018). Seventeen studies compared interventions matched for contact time but that differed in terms of the behavioural components or approaches employed. Of the 15 comparisons, all had small numbers of participants and events. Only one detected a statistically significant effect, favouring a health education approach (which the authors described as standard counselling containing information and advice) over motivational interviewing approach (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94, n = 378).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking increases quit rates. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 20%, based on a pooled estimate from 65 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of specific components that comprise behavioural support.

The effect of preoperative smoking cessation and smoking dose on postoperative complications following radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a retrospective study of 2469 patients

Background

To investigate whether smoking adversely affects the short-term outcomes and the potential effects of cigarette dose and preoperative smoking cessation, in patients who underwent gastric cancer (GC) surgery.

Methods

Two thousand, four hundred sixty-nine consecutive patients who underwent radical gastrectomy from November 2010 to July 2018 were included in the present study. Smokers (current or former smokers) were divided into 3 groups in accordance with the duration of smoking cessation preoperatively (≤ 2, 2 to 4, or ≥ 4 weeks) and the cigarette dose (≤ 20, 20 to 40, and ≥ 40 pack-years). The primary endpoint was postoperative complications (surgical site infection, pulmonary problems, bleeding, and others).

Results

A total of 1056 patients (42.8%) were smokers. Compared with non-smokers, smokers had significantly higher overall postoperative complications (11.3% vs 7.5%, P = 0.001), and in particular pulmonary problems. Smokers also had more major complications, needing intensive care unit care, and longer postoperative hospital stays. Multivariate analysis confirmed that smoking (odds ratio = 1.506, 95% confidence interval 1.131–2.004, P = 0.005) was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications. Further subgroup analysis identified that there was a positive relationship between the incidence of complications and cigarette dose, and > 20 pack-years was demonstrated to have increased significantly the risk of complications. Smokers who stopped smoking ≥ 4 weeks before surgery had lower pulmonary problems than those with a shorter period of smoking cessation.

Conclusions

Preoperative smoking cessation should be encouraged to reduce postoperative complications in GC patients, especially for heavy smokers.

The Impact of Total Body Prehabilitation on Post-Operative Outcomes After Major Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in perioperative care, post-operative clinical and functional outcomes after major abdominal surgery can be suboptimal. Prehabilitation programmes attempt to optimise a patient's preoperative condition to improve outcomes. Total body prehabilitation includes structured exercise, nutritional optimisation, psychological support and cessation of negative health behaviours. This systematic review aims to report on the current literature regarding the impact of total body prehabilitation prior to major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Relevant studies published between January 2000 and July 2017 were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database. All studies published in a peer-reviewed journal, assessing post-operative clinical and functional outcomes, following a prehabilitation programme prior to major abdominal surgery were included. Studies with less than ten patients, or a prehabilitation programme lasting less than 7 days were excluded.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included, incorporating 2591 patients, with 1255 undergoing a prehabilitation programme. The studies were very heterogeneous, with multiple surgical sub-specialties, prehabilitation techniques, and outcomes assessed. Post-operative complication rate was reduced in six gastrointestinal studies utilising either preoperative exercise, nutritional supplementation in malnourished patients or smoking cessation. Improved functional outcomes were observed following a multimodal prehabilitation programme. Compliance was variably measured across the studies (range 16-100%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial heterogeneity in the prehabilitation programmes used prior to major abdominal surgery. A multimodal approach is likely to have better impact on functional outcomes compared to single modality; however, there is insufficient data either to identify the optimum programme, or to recommend routine clinical implementation.

E-cigarettes versus nicotine patches for perioperative smoking cessation: a pilot randomized trial

Introduction

Cigarette smoking by surgical patients is associated with increased complications. E-cigarettes have emerged as a potential smoking cessation tool. We sought to determine the feasibility and acceptability of e-cigarettes, compared to nicotine patch, for perioperative smoking cessation in veterans.

Methods

Preoperative patients were randomized to either the nicotine patch group (n = 10) or the e-cigarette group (n = 20). Both groups were given a free 6-week supply in a tapering dose. All patients received brief counseling, a brochure on perioperative smoking cessation, and referral to the California Smokers’ Helpline. The primary outcome was rate of smoking cessation on day of surgery confirmed by exhaled carbon monoxide. Secondary outcomes included smoking habits, pulmonary function, adverse events, and satisfaction with the products on day of surgery and at 8-weeks follow-up.

Results

Biochemically verified smoking cessation on day of surgery was similar in both groups. Change in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was 592 ml greater in the e-cigarette group (95% CI [153–1,031] ml, p = 0.01) and change in forced expiratory volume in one second to forced vital capacity ratio (FEV1/FVC ratio) was 40.1% greater in the e-cigarette group (95% CI [18.2%–78.4%], p = 0.04). Satisfaction with the product was similar in both groups.

Discussion

E-cigarettes are a feasible tool for perioperative smoking cessation in veterans with quit rates comparable to nicotine replacement patch. Spirometry appears to be improved 8-weeks after initiating e-cigarettes compared to nicotine patch, possibly due to worse baseline spirometry and more smoking reduction in the e-cigarette group. An adequately powered study is recommended to determine if these results can be duplicated.

Smoking and alcohol cessation intervention in relation to radical cystectomy: a qualitative study of cancer patients' experiences

BACKGROUND

Despite smoking and risky alcohol drinking being modifiable risk factors for cancer as well as postoperative complications, perioperative cessation counselling is often ignored. Little is known about how cancer patients experience smoking and alcohol interventions in relation to surgery. Therefore the aim of this study was to explore how bladder cancer patients experience a perioperative smoking and alcohol cessation intervention in relation to radical cystectomy.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted in two urology out-patient clinics. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with 11 purposively sampled persons who had received the smoking and alcohol cessation intervention. The analysis followed the steps contained in the thematic network analysis.

RESULTS

Two global themes emerged: "smoking and alcohol cessation was experienced as an integral part of bladder cancer surgery" and "returning to everyday life was a barrier for continued smoking cessation/alcohol reduction". Participants described that during hospitalization their focus shifted to the operation and they did not experience craving to smoke or drink alcohol. Concurrent with improved well-being or experiencing stressful situations, the risk of relapse increased when returning to everyday life.

CONCLUSIONS

The smoking and alcohol cessation intervention was well received by the participants. Cancer surgery served as a kind of refuge and was a useful cue for motivating patients to quit smoking and to reconsider the consequences of risky drinking. These results adds to the sparse evidence of what supports smoking and alcohol cessation in relation to bladder cancer patients undergoing major surgery and point to the need to educate healthcare professionals in offering smoking and alcohol cessation interventions in hospitals. The study also provides knowledge about the intervention in the STOP-OP study and will help guide the design of future smoking and alcohol cessation studies aimed at cancer patients undergoing surgery.

Impact of alcohol & smoking on the surgical management of gastrointestinal patients

Alcohol and smoking are repeatedly described as modifiable risk factors in clinical studies across all surgical specialities. These lifestyle choices impart a sub-optimal physiology via multiple processes and play an important role in the surgical management of the gastrointestinal patient. Cessation is imperative to optimise the patient's fitness for surgery with surgery itself being a prime opportunity for sustained cessation. A consistent, planned and integrated management involving surgical, anaesthetic, medical, and primary care facets will aid in successful cessation and perioperative care. This review highlights the pathological processes which contribute to perioperative complications and details the current practices to detect, predict and appropriately manage the perioperative gastrointestinal patient who smokes and consumes alcohol.

STOP smoking and alcohol drinking before OPeration for bladder cancer (the STOP-OP study), perioperative smoking and alcohol cessation intervention in relation to radical cystectomy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

To evaluate the effect of a smoking-, alcohol- or combined-cessation intervention starting shortly before surgery and lasting 6 weeks on overall complications after radical cystectomy. Secondary objectives are to examine the effect on types and grades of complications, smoking cessation and alcohol cessation, length of hospital stay, health-related quality of life and return to work or habitual level of activity up to 12 months postoperatively.

Methods/design

The study is a multi-institutional randomised clinical trial involving 110 patients with a risky alcohol intake and daily smoking who are scheduled for radical cystectomy. Patients will be randomised to the 6-week Gold Standard Programme (GSP) or treatment as usual (control). The GSP combines patient education and pharmacologic strategies. Smoking and alcohol intake is biochemically validated (blood, urine and breath tests) at the weekly meetings and at follow-up.

Discussion

Herein, we report the design of the STOP-OP study, objectives and accrual up-date. This study will provide new knowledge about how to prevent smoking and alcohol-related postoperative complications at the time of bladder cancer surgery. Till now 77 patients have been enrolled. Patient accrual is expected to be finalised before the end of 2017 and data will be published in 2018.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02188446. Registered on 28 May 2014.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2065-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Smoking and timing of cessation on postoperative pulmonary complications after curative-intent lung cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Smoking is a risk factor for postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) following non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgery. The optimal timing for preoperative smoking cessation has not been identified. Our study aimed to observe the impact of preoperative smoking cessation on PPC incidence and other postoperative outcomes including long-term survival.

METHODS

A prospective study included consecutive patients following resection for NSCLC in a regional thoracic centre over a 4-year period (2010-2014). Patients were stratified according to self-reported preoperative smoking status. The primary endpoint was PPC incidence, which was assessed from postoperative day one onwards using the Melbourne Group Scale. Secondary endpoints included short-term outcomes (hospital length of stay [LOS], intensive therapy unit [ITU] admission, 30-day hospital readmission rate) and long-term survival.

RESULTS

Four hundred and sixty-two patients included 111 (24%) current smokers, 55 (12%) ex-smokers <6 weeks, 245 (53%) ex-smokers ≥6 weeks and 51 (11%) never smokers. PPC occurred in 60 (13%) patients in total. Compared to never smokers, current smokers had a higher frequency of PPC (22% vs. 2%, p = 0.004), higher frequency of ITU admission (14% vs. 0%; p = 0.001) and a longer median (IQR) hospital LOS (6 [5] vs. 5 [2]; p = 0.001). In the ex-smokers there was a trend for a lower frequency of PPC (<6 weeks, 10.9% vs. ≥6 weeks, 11.8%) and ITU admission (<6 weeks, 5.5% vs. ≥6 weeks, 4.5%), but there was no difference between the <6 weeks or ≥6 weeks ex-smoking groups prior to surgery. There was no significant difference in long-term survival found between the groups of differing smoking status (median follow-up 29.8 months, 95%CI 28.4-31.1).

CONCLUSION

Current smokers have higher postoperative morbidity; this risk reduces following smoking cessation but 6 weeks does not appear to identify a time-point where differences in outcomes are noted.

How Can Smoking Cessation Be Induced Before Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Behavior Change Techniques and Other Intervention Characteristics

Background: Smokers who continue to smoke up to the point of surgery are at increased risk of a range of complications during and following surgery.

Objective: To identify whether behavioral and/or pharmacological interventions increase the likelihood that smokers quit prior to elective surgery and which intervention components are associated with larger effects.

Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and Embase Classic, CINAHL, CENTRAL.

Study selection: Studies testing the effect of smoking reduction interventions delivered at least 24 h before elective surgery were included.

Study appraisal and synthesis: Potential studies were independently screened by two people. Data relating to study characteristics and risk of bias were extracted. The effects of the interventions on pre-operative smoking abstinence were estimated using random effects meta-analyses. The association between specific intervention components (behavior change techniques; mode; duration; number of sessions; interventionist) and smoking cessation effect sizes were estimated using meta-regressions.

Results: Twenty-two studies comprising 2,992 smokers were included and 19 studies were meta-analyzed. Interventions increased the proportion of smokers who were abstinent or reduced smoking by surgery relative to control: g = 0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.80, with rates nearly double in the intervention (46.2%) relative to the control (24.5%). Interventions that comprised more sessions, delivered face-to-face and by nurses, as well as specific behavior change techniques (providing information on consequence of smoking/cessation; providing information on withdrawal symptoms; goal setting; review of goals; regular monitoring by others; and giving options for additional or later support) were associated with larger effects.

Conclusion: Rates of smoking can be halved prior to surgery and a number of intervention characteristics can increase these effects. There was, however, some indication of publication bias meaning the benefits of such interventions may be smaller than estimated.

Registration: Prospero 2015: CRD42015024733

E-Cigarettes and Potential Implications for Plastic Surgery

The use of tobacco-based products, most notably cigarettes, is related directly to wound healing problems and poorer outcomes in plastic surgery. Current abstracts have highlighted the potential complications from nicotine, specifically following plastic surgery in patients who choose to smoke. Recently, products that use electricity to vaporize liquid nitrogen have been gaining popularity. New rules were recently proposed that would give the federal government authority over electronic cigarettes. However, the health-related issues surrounding e-cigarettes are still largely unknown or misunderstood. These issues also extend to their impact on surgical procedures, notably their effect on plastic surgical procedures that rely heavily on the vascularity of either the host wound bed or the replacement tissue.

Incidence and risk factors for surgical site infection after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to quantitatively summarize the risk factors associated with surgical site infection after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fracture.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang database and Cochrane central database were searched for relevant original studies from database inception to October 2016. Eligible studies had to meet quality assessment criteria according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and had to evaluate the risk factors for surgical site infection after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fracture. Stata 11.0 software was used for this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 2214 cases of tibial plateau fracture treated by open reduction and internal fixation and 219 cases of surgical site infection were included in this meta-analysis. The following parameters were identified as significant risk factors for surgical site infection after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fracture (p < 0.05): open fracture (OR 3.78; 95% CI 2.71-5.27), compartment syndrome (OR 3.53; 95% CI 2.13-5.86), operative time (OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.53-3.02), tobacco use (OR 2.13; 95% CI 1.13-3.99), and external fixation (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.05-4.09). Other factors, including male sex, were not identified as risk factors for surgical site infection.

CONCLUSION

Patients with the abovementioned medical conditions are at risk of surgical site infection after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fracture. Surgeons should be cognizant of these risks and give relevant preoperative advice.

Smoking at diagnosis significantly decreases 5-year cancer-specific survival in a population-based cohort of 18 166 colon cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Accumulating evidence suggests smoking may adversely affect cancer patients' outcomes. Previous studies of smoking and survival in colon cancer have been limited by size and/or lack of a population basis and results have been inconsistent.

AIM

To investigate in a large population-based cohort whether smoking status at diagnosis is an independent prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival in colon cancer and whether treatment modifies any impact of smoking.

METHODS

Colon adenocarcinomas diagnosed between 1994 and 2012 were abstracted from the National Cancer Registry Ireland, and classified by smoking status at diagnosis. Cancer-specific death rates over 5 years were compared in current, ex- and never smokers using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, and subgroup analyses by treatment (combinations of cancer-directed surgery and chemotherapy) were conducted.

RESULTS

Of 18 166 colon cancers, 20% of patients were current smokers, 23% ex-smokers and 57% never smokers. Compared to never smokers, current smokers had a significantly raised cancer death rate [multivariable hazard ratio (HR) = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07-1.12]. There was a significant interaction between treatment and smoking (P = 0.03). In those who had cancer-directed surgery only, but not other groups, current smokers had a significantly increased cancer death rate compared to never smokers (HR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.09-1.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking at diagnosis is an independent prognostic factor for colon cancer. The limitation of the association to surgically-treated patients suggests that the underlying mechanism(s) may be related to surgery. While further research is needed to elucidate mechanisms, continued efforts to encourage smoking prevention and cessation may yield benefits in terms of improved survival from colon cancer.

American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons® Clinical Consensus Statement: Perioperative Management

A wide range of factors contribute to the complexity of the management plan for an individual patient, and it is the surgeon's responsibility to consider the clinical variables and to guide the patient through the perioperative period. In an effort to address a number of important variables, the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons convened a panel of experts to derive a clinical consensus statement to address selected issues associated with the perioperative management of foot and ankle surgical patients.

Tobacco toxins deposited on surfaces (third hand smoke) impair wound healing

Third hand smoke (THS) is the accumulation of second hand smoke (SHS) toxins on surfaces in homes, cars, clothing and hair of smokers. It is known that 88M US nonsmokers ≥3 years old living in homes of smokers are exposed to THS toxicants and show blood cotinine levels of ≥0.05 ng/ml, indicating that the toxins are circulating in their circulatory systems. The goal of the present study is to investigate the mechanisms by which THS causes impaired wound healing. We show that mice living under conditions that mimic THS exposure in humans display delayed wound closure, impaired collagen deposition, altered inflammatory response, decreased angiogenesis, microvessels with fibrin cuffs and a highly proteolytic wound environment. Moreover, THS-exposed mouse wounds have high levels of oxidative stress and significantly lower levels of antioxidant activity leading to molecular damage, including protein nitration, lipid peroxidation and DNA damage that contribute to tissue dysfunction. Furthermore, we show that elastase is elevated, suggesting that elastin is degraded and the plasticity of the wound tissue is decreased. Taken together, our results lead us to conclude that THS toxicants delay and impair wound healing by disrupting the sequential processes that lead to normal healing. In addition, the lack of elastin results in loss of wound plasticity, which may be responsible for reopening of wounds.

Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Both behavioural support (including brief advice and counselling) and pharmacotherapies (including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline and bupropion) are effective in helping people to stop smoking. Combining both treatment approaches is recommended where possible, but the size of the treatment effect with different combinations and in different settings and populations is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of combining behavioural support and medication to aid smoking cessation, compared to a minimal intervention or usual care, and to identify whether there are different effects depending on characteristics of the treatment setting, intervention, population treated, or take-up of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in July 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of NRT, bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating combinations of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support for smoking cessation, compared to a control receiving usual care or brief advice or less intensive behavioural support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Search results were prescreened by one author and inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials was agreed by two authors. Data was extracted by one author and checked by another.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-three studies with a total of more than 25,000 participants met the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of studies recruited people in healthcare settings or with specific health needs. Most studies provided NRT. Behavioural support was typically provided by specialists in cessation counselling, who offered between four and eight contact sessions. The planned maximum duration of contact was typically more than 30 minutes but less than 300 minutes. Overall, studies were at low or unclear risk of bias, and findings were not sensitive to the exclusion of any of the six studies rated at high risk of bias in one domain. One large study (the Lung Health Study) contributed heterogeneity due to a substantially larger treatment effect than seen in other studies (RR 3.88, 95% CI 3.35 to 4.50). Since this study used a particularly intensive intervention which included extended availability of nicotine gum, multiple group sessions and long term maintenance and recycling contacts, the results may not be comparable with the interventions used in other studies, and hence it was not pooled in other analyses. Based on the remaining 52 studies (19,488 participants) there was high quality evidence (using GRADE) for a benefit of combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural treatment compared to usual care, brief advice or less intensive behavioural support (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.68 to 1.98) with moderate statistical heterogeneity (I² = 36%).The pooled estimate for 43 trials that recruited participants in healthcare settings (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.18) was higher than for eight trials with community-based recruitment (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.76). Compared to the first version of the review, previous weak evidence of differences in other subgroup analyses has disappeared. We did not detect differences between subgroups defined by motivation to quit, treatment provider, number or duration of support sessions, or take-up of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions that combine pharmacotherapy and behavioural support increase smoking cessation success compared to a minimal intervention or usual care. Updating this review with an additional 12 studies (5,000 participants) did not materially change the effect estimate. Although trials differed in the details of their populations and interventions, we did not detect any factors that modified treatment effects apart from the recruitment setting. We did not find evidence from indirect comparisons that offering more intensive behavioural support was associated with larger treatment effects.

Identifying and recruiting smokers for preoperative smoking cessation--a systematic review of methods reported in published studies

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation before surgery reduces postoperative complications, and the benefit is positively associated with the duration of being abstinent before a surgical procedure. A key issue in providing preoperative smoking cessation support is to identify people who smoke as early as possible before elective surgery. This review aims to summarise methods used to identify and recruit smokers awaiting elective surgery.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, and references of relevant reviews (up to May 2014) to identify prospective studies that evaluated preoperative smoking cessation programmes. One reviewer extracted and a second reviewer checked data from the included studies. Data extracted from included studies were presented in tables and narratively described.

RESULTS

We included 32 relevant studies, including 18 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 non-randomised studies (NRS). Smokers were recruited at preoperative clinics (n = 18), from surgery waiting lists (n = 6), or by general practitioners (n = 1), and the recruitment methods were not explicitly described in seven studies. Time points of preoperative recruitment of smokers was unclear in four studies, less than 4 weeks before surgery in 17 studies, and at least 4 weeks before surgery in only 11 studies. The recruitment rate tended to be lower in RCTs (median 58.2 %, range 9.1 to 90.9 %) than that in NRS (median 99.1 %, range 12.3 to 100 %) and lower in preoperative clinic-based RCTs (median 54.4 %, range 9.1 to 82.4 %) than that in waiting list-based RCTs (median 70.1 %, range 36.8 to 85.0 %). Smokers were recruited at least 4 weeks before surgery in four of the six waiting list-based studies and in only three of the 18 preoperative clinic-based studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Published studies often inadequately described the methods for recruiting smokers into preoperative smoking cessation programmes. Although smoking cessation at any time is beneficial, many programmes recruited smokers at times very close to scheduled surgery so that the benefit of preoperative smoking cessation may have not been fully effected. Optimal delivery of preoperative smoking cessation remains challenging, and further research is required to develop effective preoperative cessation programmes for smokers awaiting elective operations.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Effective pharmacotherapies are available to help people who are trying to stop smoking, but quitting can still be difficult and providing higher levels of behavioural support may increase success rates further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in May 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact. The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, or just written information. We did not include studies that used a contact-matched control to evaluate differences between types or components of support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author prescreened search results and two authors agreed inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials. One author extracted data and another checked them.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria with over 18,000 participants in the relevant arms. There was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity (I² = 18%) so we pooled all studies in the main analysis. There was evidence of a small but statistically significant benefit from more intensive support (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.24) for abstinence at longest follow-up. All but four of the included studies provided four or more sessions of support to the intervention group. Most trials used NRT. We did not detect significant effects for studies where the pharmacotherapy was nortriptyline (two trials) or varenicline (one trial), but this reflects the absence of evidence.In subgroup analyses, studies that provided at least four sessions of personal contact for the intervention and no personal contact for the control had slightly larger estimated effects (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45; 6 trials, 3762 participants), although a formal test for subgroup differences was not significant. Studies where all intervention counselling was via telephone (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41; 6 trials, 5311 participants) also had slightly larger effects, and the test for subgroup differences was significant, but this subgroup analysis was not prespecified. In this update, the benefit of providing additional behavioural support was similar for the subgroup of trials in which all participants, including controls, had at least 30 minutes of personal contact (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.32; 21 trials, 5166 participants); previously the evidence of benefit in this subgroup had been weaker. This subgroup was not prespecified and a test for subgroup differences was not significant. We judged the quality of the evidence to be high, using the GRADE approach. We judged a small number of trials to be at high risk of bias on one or more domains, but findings were not sensitive to their exclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking has a small but important effect. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 25%, based on a pooled estimate from 47 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support.

Preoperative smoking cessation can reduce postoperative complications in gastric cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite the close link between cigarette smoking and the development of gastric cancer, little is known about the effects of cigarette smoking on surgical outcomes after gastric cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate whether preoperative smoking status and the duration of smoking cessation were associated with short-term surgical consequences in gastric cancer surgery.

METHODS

Among 1,489 consecutive patients, 1,335 patients who underwent curative radical gastrectomy at the Samsung Medical Center between January and December 2009 were included in the present study. The smoking status was determined using questionnaires before surgery. Smokers were divided into four groups according to the duration of smoking cessation preoperatively (<2, 2-4, 4-8, and >8 weeks). The primary endpoint was postoperative complications (wound, lung, leakage, and bleeding); secondary endpoints were 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Five hundred twenty-two patients (39.1 %) were smokers. Smokers had a significantly higher overall incidence of postoperative complications than nonsmokers (12.3 vs. 5.2 %, P < 0.001, respectively), especially in impaired wound healing, pulmonary problems, and leakage. Smokers also had more severe complications than nonsmokers. After adjusting for other risk factors, the odds ratio (95 % CI) for the development of postoperative complications in the subgroups who stopped smoking <2 weeks, 2-4, 4-8, and >8 weeks preoperatively were 3.35 (1.92-5.83), 0.99 (0.22-4.38), 2.18 (1.00-4.76), and 1.32 (0.70-2.48), respectively, compared with the nonsmokers. There were no significant differences in 3-year RFS (P = 0.884) and OS (P = 0.258) between smokers and nonsmokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative smoking cessation for at least 2 weeks will help to reduce the incidence of postoperative complications in gastric cancer surgery.

Coexisting liver disease is associated with increased mortality after surgery for diverticular disease

BACKGROUND

Coexistence of liver disease in patients undergoing surgery for diverticular disease (DD) may increase the risk of postoperative complications, but the evidence is limited.

AIM

To investigate the impact of liver disease on mortality and reoperation rates following surgery for DD.

METHODS

We performed a cohort study based on medical databases of all patients undergoing surgery for DD in Denmark during 1977-2011, categorizing them into three cohorts according to history of liver disease: patients with non-cirrhotic liver disease, those with liver cirrhosis, and those without liver disease (comparison cohort). Using the Kaplan-Meier method, we computed mortality in each cohort for 0-30, 31-60, and 61-90 days following surgery for DD. We used a Cox regression model to compute hazard ratios as measures of the relative risk (RR) of death, controlling for potential confounders, including other comorbidities. In addition, we assessed the reoperation rate within 30 days of initial surgery.

RESULTS

Of 14,408 patients undergoing surgery for DD, 233 (1.6 %) had non-cirrhotic liver disease and 91 (0.6 %) had liver cirrhosis. Thirty-day mortality was 9.9 % in patients without liver disease and 14.6 % in patients with non-cirrhotic liver disease [adjusted RR = 1.64 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.16-2.31)]. Among patients with liver cirrhosis, mortality was 24.2 % [adjusted RR = 2.70 (95 % CI 1.73-4.22)]. Liver cirrhosis had an impact on mortality up to 60 days after surgery for DD. The reoperation rate was approximately 10 % in each cohort.

CONCLUSION

Preexisting liver disease has a major impact on postoperative mortality following surgery for DD.

Effect of Cigarette Smoking on the Clinical Outcomes of ACL Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

We compared the clinical outcomes of nonsmokers, current smokers, and former smokers following reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and investigated the association between the amount of smoking and outcomes following ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 251 patients who underwent unilateral ACL reconstruction with use of bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft between January 2002 and August 2009. Patients were divided into three groups according to smoking history: Group 1, nonsmokers; Group 2, current smokers; and Group 3, former smokers. Preoperative values and twenty-four-month postoperative findings were compared among the groups. The stability of the ACL was evaluated with use of the Lachman test and the pivot-shift test, and anterior translation was tested with a KT2000 arthrometer. Functional outcomes were assessed on the basis of the Lysholm score and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score and objective grade.

RESULTS

The three groups differed significantly in terms of postoperative knee translation, Lysholm score, and IKDC subjective score. The mean side-to-side difference in anterior translation (and standard deviation) was 2.08 ± 1.08 mm in Group 1 (nonsmokers), 2.65 ± 1.31 mm in Group 2 (smokers), and 2.15 ± 1.05 mm in Group 3 (former smokers) (p = 0.003). The mean Lysholm score was 90.5 ± 6.5 in Group 1, 86.0 ± 7.1 in Group 2, and 89.8 ± 6.3 in Group 3 (p < 0.001). The mean IKDC subjective score was 89.3 ± 5.1 in Group 1, 84.9 ± 7.5 in Group 2, and 88.5 ± 4.2 in Group 3 (p < 0.001). However, the difference in the IKDC subjective score among the three groups did not demonstrate a minimal clinically important difference. A dose-dependent association was noted between pack-years of exposure and postoperative anterior translation (estimate, 0.039; p = 0.015) and IKDC objective grade (odds ratio, 1.083; p = 0.002). A comparison of the three subgroups of smokers showed a significant difference in anterior translation (a mean side-to-side difference in anterior translation of 2.31 ± 1.17 mm for the light smokers, 2.60 ± 1.14 mm for the moderate smokers, and 3.29 ± 1.55 mm for the heavy smokers; p = 0.038). The three subgroups also differed significantly in terms of the proportion of cases by IKDC objective grade; among the light smokers, thirteen (42%) were grade A, fifteen (48%) were grade B, two (7%) were grade C, and one (3%) was grade D; among the moderate smokers, seven (35%) were grade A, eight (40%) were grade B, four (20%) were grade C, and one (5%) was grade D; and among the heavy smokers, one (6%) was grade A, eight (44%) were grade B, eight (44%) were grade C, and one (6%) was grade D (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Cigarette smoking appeared to have a negative effect on subjective and objective outcomes of ACL reconstruction, and heavy smokers showed greater knee instability. Patients who had stopped smoking at least one month prior to ACL reconstruction had no significant difference in outcomes compared with patients who had never smoked.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Interventions for preoperative smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Smokers have a substantially increased risk of postoperative complications. Preoperative smoking intervention may be effective in decreasing this incidence, and surgery may constitute a unique opportunity for smoking cessation interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this review are to assess the effect of preoperative smoking intervention on smoking cessation at the time of surgery and 12 months postoperatively, and on the incidence of postoperative complications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that recruited people who smoked prior to surgery, offered a smoking cessation intervention, and measured preoperative and long-term abstinence from smoking or the incidence of postoperative complications or both outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors independently assessed studies to determine eligibility, and discussed the results between them.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials enrolling 2010 participants met the inclusion criteria. One trial did not report cessation as an outcome. Seven reported some measure of postoperative morbidity. Most studies were judged to be at low risk of bias but the overall quality of evidence was moderate due to the small number of studies contributing to each comparison.Ten trials evaluated the effect of behavioural support on cessation at the time of surgery; nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was offered or recommended to some or all participants in eight of these. Two trials initiated multisession face-to-face counselling at least four weeks before surgery and were classified as intensive interventions, whilst seven used a brief intervention. One further study provided an intensive intervention to both groups, with the intervention group additionally receiving a computer-based scheduled reduced smoking intervention. One placebo-controlled trial examined the effect of varenicline administered one week preoperatively followed by 11 weeks postoperative treatment, and one placebo-controlled trial examined the effect of nicotine lozenges from the night before surgery as an adjunct to brief counselling at the preoperative evaluation. There was evidence of heterogeneity between the effects of trials using intensive and brief interventions, so we pooled these separately. An effect on cessation at the time of surgery was apparent in both subgroups, but the effect was larger for intensive intervention (pooled risk ratio (RR) 10.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.55 to 25.46, two trials, 210 participants) than for brief interventions (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.46, 7 trials, 1141 participants). A single trial did not show evidence of benefit of a scheduled reduced smoking intervention. Neither nicotine lozenges nor varenicline were shown to increase cessation at the time of surgery but both had wide confidence intervals (RR 1.34; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.10 (1 trial, 46 participants) and RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.98 to 2.26 (1 trial, 286 participants) respectively). Four of these trials evaluated long-term smoking cessation and only the intensive intervention retained a significant effect (RR 2.96; 95% CI 1.57 to 5.55, 2 trials, 209 participants), whilst there was no evidence of a long-term effect following a brief intervention (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.75, 2 trials, 341 participants). The trial of varenicline did show a significant effect on long-term smoking cessation (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.07, 1 trial, 286 participants).Seven trials examined the effect of smoking intervention on postoperative complications. As with smoking outcomes, there was evidence of heterogeneity between intensive and brief behavioural interventions. In subgroup analyses there was a significant effect of intensive intervention on any complications (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.65, 2 trials, 210 participants) and on wound complications (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.62, 2 trials, 210 participants). For brief interventions, where the impact on smoking had been smaller, there was no evidence of a reduction in complications (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.19, 4 trials, 493 participants) for any complication (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.40, 3 trials, 325 participants) for wound complications. The trial of varenicline did not detect an effect on postoperative complications (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.72, 1 trial, 286 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that preoperative smoking interventions providing behavioural support and offering NRT increase short-term smoking cessation and may reduce postoperative morbidity. One trial of varenicline begun shortly before surgery has shown a benefit on long-term cessation but did not detect an effect on early abstinence or on postoperative complications. The optimal preoperative intervention intensity remains unknown. Based on indirect comparisons and evidence from two small trials, interventions that begin four to eight weeks before surgery, include weekly counselling and use NRT are more likely to have an impact on complications and on long-term smoking cessation.

Interventions for preoperative smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Smokers have a substantially increased risk of postoperative complications. Preoperative smoking intervention may be effective in decreasing this incidence, and surgery may constitute a unique opportunity for smoking cessation interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this review are to assess the effect of preoperative smoking intervention on smoking cessation at the time of surgery and 12 months postoperatively, and on the incidence of postoperative complications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that recruited people who smoked prior to surgery, offered a smoking cessation intervention, and measured preoperative and long-term abstinence from smoking or the incidence of postoperative complications or both outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors independently assessed studies to determine eligibility, and discussed the results between them.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials enrolling 2010 participants met the inclusion criteria. One trial did not report cessation as an outcome. Seven reported some measure of postoperative morbidity. Most studies were judged to be at low risk of bias but the overall quality of evidence was moderate due to the small number of studies contributing to each comparison.Ten trials evaluated the effect of behavioural support on cessation at the time of surgery; nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was offered or recommended to some or all participants in eight of these. Two trials initiated multisession face-to-face counselling at least four weeks before surgery and were classified as intensive interventions, whilst seven used a brief intervention. One further study provided an intensive intervention to both groups, with the intervention group additionally receiving a computer-based scheduled reduced smoking intervention. One placebo-controlled trial examined the effect of varenicline administered one week preoperatively followed by 11 weeks postoperative treatment, and one placebo-controlled trial examined the effect of nicotine lozenges from the night before surgery as an adjunct to brief counselling at the preoperative evaluation. There was evidence of heterogeneity between the effects of trials using intensive and brief interventions, so we pooled these separately. An effect on cessation at the time of surgery was apparent in both subgroups, but the effect was larger for intensive intervention (pooled risk ratio (RR) 10.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.55 to 25.46, two trials, 210 participants) than for brief interventions (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.46, 7 trials, 1141 participants). A single trial did not show evidence of benefit of a scheduled reduced smoking intervention. Neither nicotine lozenges nor varenicline were shown to increase cessation at the time of surgery but both had wide confidence intervals (RR 1.34; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.10 (1 trial, 46 participants) and RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.98 to 2.26 (1 trial, 286 participants) respectively). Four of these trials evaluated long-term smoking cessation and only the intensive intervention retained a significant effect (RR 2.96; 95% CI 1.57 to 5.55, 2 trials, 209 participants), whilst there was no evidence of a long-term effect following a brief intervention (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.75, 2 trials, 341 participants). The trial of varenicline did show a significant effect on long-term smoking cessation (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.07, 1 trial, 286 participants).Seven trials examined the effect of smoking intervention on postoperative complications. As with smoking outcomes, there was evidence of heterogeneity between intensive and brief behavioural interventions. In subgroup analyses there was a significant effect of intensive intervention on any complications (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.65, 2 trials, 210 participants) and on wound complications (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.62, 2 trials, 210 participants). For brief interventions, where the impact on smoking had been smaller, there was no evidence of a reduction in complications (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.19, 4 trials, 493 participants) for any complication (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.40, 3 trials, 325 participants) for wound complications. The trial of varenicline did not detect an effect on postoperative complications (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.72, 1 trial, 286 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that preoperative smoking interventions providing behavioural support and offering NRT increase short-term smoking cessation and may reduce postoperative morbidity. One trial of varenicline begun shortly before surgery has shown a benefit on long-term cessation but did not detect an effect on early abstinence or on postoperative complications. The optimal preoperative intervention intensity remains unknown. Based on indirect comparisons and evidence from two small trials, interventions that begin four to eight weeks before surgery, include weekly counselling and use NRT are more likely to have an impact on complications and on long-term smoking cessation.

The impact of smoking on neurosurgical outcomes

Cigarette smoking is a common health risk behavior among the general adult population, and is the leading preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in the US. The surgical literature shows that active tobacco smoking is a major risk factor for perioperative morbidity and complications, and that preoperative smoking cessation is an effective measure to lower these risks associated with active smoking. However, few studies have examined the effects of smoking and perioperative complications following neurosurgical procedures. The goal of this review was to highlight the scientific data that do exist regarding the impact of smoking on neurosurgical outcomes, to promote awareness of the need for further work in the specific neurosurgical context, and to suggest ways that neurosurgeons can promote smoking cessation in their patients and lead efforts nationally to emphasize the importance of preoperative smoking cessation. This review indicates that there is limited but good evidence that smoking is associated with higher rates of perioperative complications following neurosurgical intervention. Specific research is needed to understand the effects of smoking and perioperative complications. Neurosurgeons should encourage preoperative smoking cessation as part of their clinical practice to mitigate perioperative morbidity associated with active smoking.

Tobacco smoking and postoperative outcomes after colorectal surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to delineate the impact of smoking on postoperative outcomes after colorectal resection for malignant and benign processes.

BACKGROUND

Studies to date have implicated smoking as a risk factor for increased postoperative complications. However, there is a paucity of data on the effects of smoking after colorectal surgery and in particular for malignant compared with benign processes.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005-2010) database was queried for patients undergoing elective major colorectal resection for colorectal cancer, diverticular disease, or inflammatory bowel disease. Risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes were assessed and compared between patient cohorts identified as never-smokers, ex-smokers, and current smokers. Primary outcomes of incisional infections, infectious and major complications, and mortality were evaluated using regression modeling adjusting for patient characteristics and comorbidities.

RESULTS

A total of 47,574 patients were identified, of which 26,333 had surgery for colorectal cancer, 14,019 for diverticular disease, and 7222 for inflammatory bowel disease. More than 60% of patients had never smoked, 20.4% were current smokers, and 19.2% were ex-smokers. After adjustment, current smokers were at a significantly increased risk of postoperative morbidity [odds ratio (OR), 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.21-1.40] and mortality (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.11-1.94) after colorectal surgery. This finding persisted across malignant and benign diagnoses and also demonstrated a significant dose-dependent effect when stratifying by pack-years of smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking increases the risk of complications after all types of major colorectal surgery, with the greatest risk apparent for current smokers. A concerted effort should be made toward promoting smoking cessation in all patients scheduled for elective colorectal surgery.