Prehabilitation: how to prepare our patients for elective major abdominal surgeries?

[Older patients in abdominal surgery]

BACKGROUND

The aging society imposes special challenges on operative medicine.

OBJECTIVE

Characteristics in the perioperative treatment of older patients. Consequences for the daily practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Evaluation and summary of existing literature including recommendations for the (peri)operative management of older patients.

RESULTS

Despite the growing relevance there are only few studies focusing on older patients. The altered (patho)physiology and comorbidities are challenging and can lead to complications.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of the indications for surgery should meticulously take the improvement to be expected into account by weighing up the individual wishes of patients and special risks. The adequate perioperative care including early mobilization and sufficient analgesia are decisive.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A prospective cohort study evaluating screening and assessment of six modifiable risk factors in HPB cancer patients and compliance to recommended prehabilitation interventions

Introduction

Despite improvements in perioperative care, major abdominal surgery continues to be associated with significant perioperative morbidity. Accurate preoperative risk stratification and optimisation (prehabilitation) are necessary to reduce perioperative morbidity. This study evaluated the screening and assessment of modifiable risk factors amendable for prehabilitation interventions and measured the patient compliance rate with recommended interventions.

Method

Between May 2019 and January 2020, patients referred to our hospital for HPB surgery were screened and assessed on six modifiable preoperative risk factors. The risk factors and screening tools used, with cutoff values, included (i) low physical fitness (a 6-min walk test < 82% of patient’s calculated norm and/or patient’s activity level not meeting the global recommendations on physical activity for health). Patients who were unfit based on the screening were assessed with a cardiopulmonary exercise test (anaerobic threshold ≤ 11 mL/kg/min); (ii) malnutrition (patient-generated subjective global assessment ≥ 4); (iii) iron-deficiency anaemia (haemoglobin < 12 g/dL for women, < 13 g/dL for men and transferrin saturation ≤ 20%); (iv) frailty (Groningen frailty indicator/Robinson frailty score ≥ 4); (v) substance use (smoking and alcohol use of > 5 units per week) and (vi) low psychological resilience (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale ≥ 8). Patients had a consultation with the surgeon on the same day as their screening. High-risk patients were referred for necessary interventions.

Results

One hundred consecutive patients were screened at our prehabilitation outpatient clinic. The prevalence of high-risk patients per risk factor was 64% for low physical fitness, 42% for malnutrition, 32% for anaemia (in 47% due to iron deficiency), 22% for frailty, 12% for smoking, 18% for alcohol use and 21% for low psychological resilience. Of the 77 patients who were eventually scheduled for surgery, 53 (68.8%) needed at least one intervention, of whom 28 (52.8%) complied with 100% of the necessary interventions. The median (IQR) number of interventions needed in the 77 patients was 1.0 (0–2).

Conclusion

It is feasible to screen and assess all patients referred for HPB cancer surgery for six modifiable risk factors. Most of the patients had at least one risk factor that could be optimised. However, compliance with the suggested interventions remains challenging.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13741-020-00175-z.

Quality management in surgery: improving clinical and surgical outcomes

Quality is a term used by various specialists, from different perspectives, having as a common point to identify focuses that promote their development in institutional management. Quality processes allow us to improve assistance, reducing complication and death rates and reducing costs. Currently, the positive experience of the patient is highly valued and should be sought by all institutions. The benefits of quality procedures are extensive. There is evidence of lower complication and mortality rates, cost reduction, uniformity of care, improved communication and opportunity for health education. There is a need for financial investment by the institutions, but they can be converted in the future. The idea that these are just bureaucratic steps must be fought because individualistic attitudes are no longer part of safe medicine. The success of a quality process requires interdisciplinarity, integration with quality offices for effective communication. The implementation of feasible attitudes should be sought, with a high adherence rate to seek patient satisfaction and safety. We will address historical aspects, the requirements for the implementation of a quality program, the concepts of indicators and the aspects that influence the quality in surgery, in addition to presenting benefits that such a program can offer to the surgeon and the institution.

Frailty, geriatric assessment and prehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing urological surgery - is there a need for change of the daily clinical practice? Synthesis of the available literature

Introduction

The population of older people is heterogeneous and constantly growing. Over 50% of urological operations are performed in elderly patients. Some elderly patients present with frailty syndrome - a state of increased vulnerability to external stressors resulting in increased risk of hospitalizations, adverse treatment outcomes and death. Currently, there is no widely accepted system of qualification and preparation for surgical treatment developed specifically for elderly patients.

Material and methods

We searched Medline/Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Libraries databases from 2000-2020 (week 5). The following medical subject headings (MeSH) terms were used to ensure the sensitivity of the searches: geriatric assessment, frailty, urology, and prehabilitation. Relevant articles were also identified through a manual search of the reference lists of potentially relevant articles.

Results

A total of 23 papers met the criteria and were included in the current study. Screening for frailty seems to be promising in predicting adverse outcomes, but frail patients should undergo detailed geriatric assessment (GA) which may indicate a need for preoperative intervention which can be unavailable during the hospitalization. The concept of prehabilitation is becoming increasingly discussed in thoracic and abdominal surgery, but only a few studies are available in the field of urology.

Conclusions

Geriatric assessment seems to be a valuable tool for urologists in daily clinical practice. A proper form of prehabilitation may provide enhanced recovery after surgery.