Sivesh K Kamarajah1, James Bundred2, Jonathan Weblin3, Benjamin H L Tan4. 1. Institute of Cellular Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, United Kingdom; Department of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle University Trust Hospitals, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, United Kingdom. 2. College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Physiotherapy, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, United Kingdom. 4. Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, United Kingdom. Electronic address: benjamin.tan@uhb.nhs.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been increasing interest in the prehabilitation of patients undergoing major abdominal surgery to improve perioperative outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the current literature on prehabilitation in major abdominal surgery and cardiothoracic surgery METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting prehabilitation in patients undergoing major abdominal and cardiothoracic surgery. Meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes (overall and major complications, pulmonary and cardiac complications, postoperative pneumonia, and length of hospital stay) was performed using random effects models. RESULTS: Five thousand nine hundred and twenty-one patients underwent prehabilitation in 61 studies, of which 35 studies (n = 3,402) were in major abdominal surgery and 26 studies were in cardiothoracic surgery (n = 2,519). Only 45 studies compared the impact of prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes (abdominal, n = 26; cardiothoracic, n = 19). Quality of evidence for prehabilitation in major abdominal and cardiothoracic surgery appear equivalent. Patients receiving prehabilitation for major abdominal surgery have significantly lower rates of overall (n = 10, odds ratio: 0.61, confidence interval 95%: 0.43-0.86, P = .005), pulmonary (n = 15, odds ratio: 0.41, confidence interval 95%: 0.25-0.67, P < .001), and cardiac complications (n = 4, odds ratio: 0.46, confidence interval 95%: 0.22-0.96, P = .044). Sensitivity analysis including randomized controlled trials only did not alter the findings of this study. CONCLUSION: Prehabilitation has the potential to improve surgical outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal and cardiothoracic surgery. However, current evidence from randomized studies remains weak owing to variation in prehabilitation regimes, limiting the assessment of current postoperative outcomes.
BACKGROUND: There has been increasing interest in the prehabilitation of patients undergoing major abdominal surgery to improve perioperative outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the current literature on prehabilitation in major abdominal surgery and cardiothoracic surgery METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting prehabilitation in patients undergoing major abdominal and cardiothoracic surgery. Meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes (overall and major complications, pulmonary and cardiac complications, postoperative pneumonia, and length of hospital stay) was performed using random effects models. RESULTS: Five thousand nine hundred and twenty-one patients underwent prehabilitation in 61 studies, of which 35 studies (n = 3,402) were in major abdominal surgery and 26 studies were in cardiothoracic surgery (n = 2,519). Only 45 studies compared the impact of prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes (abdominal, n = 26; cardiothoracic, n = 19). Quality of evidence for prehabilitation in major abdominal and cardiothoracic surgery appear equivalent. Patients receiving prehabilitation for major abdominal surgery have significantly lower rates of overall (n = 10, odds ratio: 0.61, confidence interval 95%: 0.43-0.86, P = .005), pulmonary (n = 15, odds ratio: 0.41, confidence interval 95%: 0.25-0.67, P < .001), and cardiac complications (n = 4, odds ratio: 0.46, confidence interval 95%: 0.22-0.96, P = .044). Sensitivity analysis including randomized controlled trials only did not alter the findings of this study. CONCLUSION: Prehabilitation has the potential to improve surgical outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal and cardiothoracic surgery. However, current evidence from randomized studies remains weak owing to variation in prehabilitation regimes, limiting the assessment of current postoperative outcomes.
Authors: Elizabeth Shelton; Nicolas B Barreto; Serena Bidwell; Margaret Folk-Tolbert; Andrew Shelton; Amber W Trickey; Cindy J Kin Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2021-10-19 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Kahli E Zietlow; Serena Wong; Mitchell T Heflin; Shelley R McDonald; Robert Sickeler; Michael Devinney; Jeanna Blitz; Sandhya Lagoo-Deenadayalan; Miles Berger Journal: Am J Med Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Aaron J Grossberg; Linda C Chu; Christopher R Deig; Eliot K Fishman; William L Hwang; Anirban Maitra; Daniel L Marks; Arnav Mehta; Nima Nabavizadeh; Diane M Simeone; Colin D Weekes; Charles R Thomas Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2020-07-19 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Laura van Wijk; Lizzel van der Snee; Carlijn I Buis; Judith E K R Hentzen; Marjolein E Haveman; Joost M Klaase Journal: Perioper Med (Lond) Date: 2021-02-17
Authors: Sivesh K Kamarajah; Anantha Madhavan; Jakub Chmelo; Maziar Navidi; Shajahan Wahed; Arul Immanuel; Nick Hayes; S Michael Griffin; Alexander W Phillips Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Aaron R Dezube; Daniel P Dolan; Emanuele Mazzola; Suden Kucukak; Luis E De Leon; Raphael Bueno; M Blair Marshall; Michael T Jaklitsch; Matthew M Rochefort Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2022-01-18
Authors: Antero do Vale Fernandes; Daniel Moreira-Gonçalves; Jotamo Come; Nilton Caetano Rosa; Victor Costa; Lygia Vieira Lopes; Paulo Matos da Costa; Lúcio Lara Santos Journal: Pan Afr Med J Date: 2020-06-03