Promising results of a new treatment in patients with bowel obstruction in colorectal surgery

IntroductionBowel obstruction increases risk of emergency surgery and leads to suboptimal physical and nutritional condition. Preventing emergency surgery and prehabilitation might improve outcomes. This pilot study aimed to examine the effect of a multimodal obstruction protocol for bowel obstruction patients on the risk of emergency surgery and postoperative morbidity and mortality.Materials and methodsAll bowel obstruction patients treated according to the obstruction protocol in the period 2013–2017 were included in this uncontrolled observational cohort study. Benign and malignant causes of bowel obstruction were included. The protocol consisted of: 1. specific dietary adjustments to reduce prestenotic dilatation, 2. oral laxatives and 3. prehabilitation. Emergency surgery and postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were compared to known rates from the literature.ResultsSixty-one patients were included: 44 (72%) were treated for colorectal cancer and 17 (28%) for Crohn's disease or diverticulitis. Four patients (7%) underwent emergency surgery. Primary anastomosis was constructed in 49 out of 57 elective patients (86%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) occurred in four patients (7%). No bowel perforation, anastomotic leakages or 30-day mortality was observed. These rates were much lower than rates reported in the literature after surgery for colorectal cancer (3% bowel perforation, 8% anastomotic leakage, 4% 30-day mortality, 15% severe complications) and benign disease (30-day mortality 17%, severe complications 7%).ConclusionUsing the obstruction protocol in patients with bowel obstruction reduced emergency surgery and postoperative morbidity and mortality in this pilot study. This protocol seems to be a viable and efficient alternative to emergency surgery.     

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

ObjectivesMorbidity rates following liver resection are high, especially among older adult patients. This review aims to evaluate the evidence surrounding prehabilitation in older patients anticipating liver resection and to describe how prehabilitation may be implemented.DesignProblem-based narrative review with case-based discussion.Setting and ParticipantsAll older adults anticipating liver resection inclusive of benign and malignant etiologies in the United States.MethodsLiterature search was performed using MeSH terms and keywords in MEDLINE via PubMed, followed by a manual second search for relevant references within selected articles. Articles were excluded if not available in the English language or did not include patients undergoing hepatectomy.ResultsPrehabilitation includes a range of activities including exercise, nutrition/dietary changes, and psychosocial interventions that may occur from several weeks to days preceding a surgical operation. Older adult patients who participate in prehabilitation may experience improvement in preoperative candidacy as well as improved postoperative quality of life and faster return to baseline; however, evidence supporting a reduction in postoperative length of stay and perioperative morbidity and mortality is conflicting. A variety of modalities are available for prehabilitation but lack consensus and standardization. For a provider desiring to prescribe prehabilitation, multidisciplinary assessments including geriatric, cardiopulmonary, and future remnant liver function can help determine individual patient needs and select appropriate interventions.Conclusions and ImplicationsIn the older adult patient undergoing liver resection, the current body of literature suggests promising benefits of prehabilitation programs inclusive of functional assessment as well as multimodal interventions. Additional research is needed to determine best practices.     

Perioperative exercise training for patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Exercise training is emerging as a supportive treatment strategy in surgical oncology, but its effects remain uncertain in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of perioperative exercise training on gastrointestinal cancer-specific mortality, recurrence, and surgical outcomes (postoperative complications, hospitalization, surgical stress) in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of perioperative exercise training versus control in patients with GI cancer were eligible. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus were systematically searched on June 20, 2020. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias, and GRADE assessments were performed independently by two authors. Ten randomized controlled trials comprising 448 participants with gastrointestinal cancer were eligible. Meta-analyses indicated no statistical effects of exercise on postoperative complications (risk ratio: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.84; 1.47), readmissions (risk ratio: 2.76; 95% CI: 0.00, 9394.76), or postoperative length of stay (difference in means: −0.47, 95% CI: −17.2; 16.2 days). None of the eligible studies assessed gastrointestinal cancer-specific mortality or recurrence. Overall risk of bias was high or of some concerns in all studies, and the certainty of evidence was very low. The effects of perioperative exercise on cancer-specific and surgical outcomes are unknown in patients with gastrointestinal cancer due to lack of studies and very low certainty of evidence.     

Quality and clinical generalizability of feasibility outcomes in exercise prehabilitation before colorectal cancer surgery – A systematic review

Suboptimal quality of feasibility assessments might partially explain inconsistencies observed in the effectiveness of exercise prehabilitation before colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. This systematic review aimed to assess the reporting quality and clinical generalizability of feasibility outcomes in feasibility studies addressing exercise prehabilitation before CRC surgery.PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL were searched to identify all feasibility studies focussing on exercise prehabilitation in CRC surgery. Reporting quality was assessed using the Thabane et al. checklist and the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for feasibility studies. Clinical generalizability was evaluated by appraising patient participation in all steps of the study and intervention.Twelve studies were included. The main feasibility outcome in all studies was adherence to the intervention by the study sample. Based on adherence, 10 studies (83%) concluded exercise prehabilitation to be feasible. Six studies (50%) reported all details to assess patient participation showing retention rates between 18.4% and 58.2%, which was caused by non-participation and drop-out. Three feasibility studies (25%) discussed patient-reported barriers to participation and five additional studies (41%) described potential selection bias. Four studies (33%) reported lessons learned to solve issues hampering feasibility and clinical generalizability.Results suggest that true feasibility of exercise prehabilitation before CRC surgery remains questionable due to poor reporting quality, insufficient clarity regarding the representativeness of the study sample for the target population, and limited attention for clinical generalizability. Feasibility of exercise prehabilitation might be improved by offering supervised community- or home-based interventions tailored to the physical and mental abilities of the patient.     

Fit4Surgery for cancer patients during covid-19 lockdown – A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundPrehabilitation is a promising method to enhance postoperative recovery, especially in patients suffering from cancer. Particularly during times of social distancing, providing home-based programmes may have become a suitable solution to increase compliance and effectiveness.MethodsIn line with the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted including trials that investigated the effect of home-based prehabilitation (HBP) in patients undergoing surgery for cancer. The primary outcome was postoperative functional capacity (6 min walk test, 6MWT). Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and compliance.ResultsFive randomized controlled trials were included with 351 patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer, oesophagogastric cancer, bladder cancer and non-small cell lung cancer. Three studies presented results of significant progress after eight weeks. The meta-analysis showed a significant improvement of the 6MWT in the prehabilitation group compared to the control group preoperatively (MD 35.06; 95% CI 11.58 to 58.54; p = .003) and eight weeks postoperatively (MD 44.91; 95% CI 6.04 to 83.79; p = .02) compared to baseline. Compliance rate varied from 63% to 83% with no significant difference between prehabilitation and control groups. These data must be interpreted with caution because of a high amount of heterogeneity and small sample sizes.DiscussionIn conclusion, HBP may enhance overall functional capacity of patients receiving oncological surgery compared to standard of care. This could be a promising alternative to hospital-based prehabilitation regarding the current pandemic and further digitalization in the future. In order to increase accessibility and effectiveness of prehabilitation, home-based solutions should be further investigated.