Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: 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?2 = 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.

SUBMITTER: Daniels SL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7709363 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Daniels S L SL Lee M J MJ George J J Kerr K K Moug S S Wilson T R TR Brown S R SR Wyld L L

BJS open 20200922

<h4>Background</h4>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.<h4>Methods</h4>Systematic searches were conducted using MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and PsychINFO. Studies of preoperative intervention (prehabilitation) in patients undergoing abdominal cancer sur ...[more]

PMID: 32959532

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives: This systematic review set out to identify, evaluate and synthesise the evidence examining the effect of prehabilitation including exercise on postoperative outcomes following abdominal cancer surgery. Methods: Five electronic databases (MEDLINE 1946-2020, EMBASE 1947-2020, CINAHL 1937-2020, PEDro 1999-2020, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials 1991-2020) were systematically searched (until August 2020) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effects of prehabilitation interventions in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery. This review included any form of prehabilitation either unimodal or multimodal that included whole body and/or respiratory exercises as a stand-alone intervention or in addition to other prehabilitation interventions (such as nutrition and psychology) compared to standard care. Results: Twenty-two studies were included in the systematic review and 21 studies in the meta-analysis. There was moderate quality of evidence that multimodal prehabilitation improves pre-operative functional capacity as measured by 6 min walk distance (Mean difference [MD] 33.09 metres, 95% CI 17.69-48.50; p = <0.01) but improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness such as preoperative oxygen consumption at peak exercise (VO2 peak; MD 1.74 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.03-3.50; p = 0.05) and anaerobic threshold (AT; MD 1.21 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.34-2.76; p = 0.13) were not significant. A reduction in hospital length of stay (MD 3.68 days, 95% CI 0.92-6.44; p = 0.009) was observed but no effect was observed for postoperative complications (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.55-1.18; p = 0.27), pulmonary complications (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01; p = 0.05), hospital re-admission (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.61-1.90; p = 0.81) or postoperative mortality (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.43-2.09, p = 0.90). Conclusion: Multimodal prehabilitation improves preoperative functional capacity with reduction in hospital length of stay. This supports the need for ongoing research on innovative cost-effective prehabilitation approaches, research within large multicentre studies to verify this effect and to explore implementation strategies within clinical practise.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough prehabilitation programmes for patients undergoing major intra-abdominal cancer surgery have been shown to improve pre-operative physical fitness, the conclusions regarding any postoperative benefits are inconsistent.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the content of and the outcome measures used in studies of prehabilitation programmes for these patients. It was hypothesised that the content of prehabilitation programmes is often therapeutically invalid, and that the postoperative outcomes assessed are inadequate to evaluate the impact of complications.DesignA systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesStudies published between January 2009 and January 2019 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase and PEDro.Eligibility criteriaStudies were included when they investigated the effects of prehabilitation in patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgery for cancer, reported pre-operative and/or postoperative outcome measures and were conducted as a randomised controlled trial. Studies for which the full text was not available were excluded, as were studies of patients undergoing nonabdominal cancer surgery.ResultsEight studies (565 patients) were included. Therapeutic validity was low in five studies. Most studies included low-risk surgical patients and considerable variation was observed between prehabilitation programmes in terms of supervision, training context, frequency, intensity, duration and training type. Objective monitoring of training progression was typically not performed, and most trials did not include nutritional or psychological support. Postoperative complications were reported in seven studies, but no study reported the impact of postoperative complications, nor on long-term postoperative outcomes.ConclusionThe content of prehabilitation programmes was heterogeneous. Studies with a high therapeutic validity found unequivocal evidence that prehabilitation had beneficial effects on postoperative outcomes. Future research should focus on adequate selection and inclusion of high-risk surgical patients and provide personalised and probably multimodal (partly) supervised prehabilitation, with objective monitoring of progress. Measuring the incidence and impact of postoperative complications may contribute to demonstrating the clinical value of prehabilitation.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the benefits and harms of pre-admission interventions (prehabilitation) on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing major elective surgery.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (published or unpublished). We searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, DARE, HTA and NHS EED, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsychINFO and ISI Web of Science (June 2020).SettingSecondary care.ParticipantsPatients (≥18 years) undergoing major elective surgery (curative or palliative).InterventionsAny intervention administered in the preoperative period with the aim of improving postoperative outcomes.Outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay (LoS) and postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included LoS in intensive care unit or high dependency unit, perioperative morbidity, hospital readmission, postoperative pain, heath-related quality of life, outcomes specific to the intervention, intervention-specific adverse events and resource use.Review methodsTwo authors independently extracted data from eligible RCTs and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool data across trials.Results178 RCTs including eight types of intervention were included. Inspiratory muscle training (IMT), immunonutrition and multimodal interventions reduced hospital LoS (mean difference vs usual care: -1.81 days, 95% CI -2.31 to -1.31; -2.11 days, 95% CI -3.07 to -1.15; -1.67 days, 95% CI -2.31 to -1.03, respectively). Immunonutrition reduced infective complications (risk ratio (RR) 0.64 95% CI 0.40 to 1.01) and IMT, and exercise reduced postoperative pulmonary complications (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.80, and RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75, respectively). Smoking cessation interventions reduced wound infections (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.64).ConclusionsSome prehabilitation interventions may reduce postoperative LoS and complications but the quality of the evidence was low.Prospero registration numberCRD42015019191.

Project description:BackgroundPrehabilitation aims at enhancing patients' functional capacity and overall health status to enable them to withstand a forthcoming stressor like surgery. Our aim was to synthesise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery compared with usual preoperative care.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, the CRD database, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP and the dissertation databases OADT and DART. Studies comparing prehabilitation for patients with elective surgery to usual preoperative care were included if they reported cost outcomes. All types of economic evaluations (EEs) were included. The primary outcome of the review was cost-effectiveness based on cost-utility analyses (CUAs). The risk of bias of trial-based EEs was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and the ROBINS-I tool and the credibility of model-based EEs with the ISPOR checklist. Methodological quality of full EEs was assessed using the CHEC checklist. The EEs' results were synthesised narratively using vote counting based on direction of effect.ResultsWe included 45 unique studies: 25 completed EEs and 20 ongoing studies. Of the completed EEs, 22 were trial-based and three model-based, corresponding to four CUAs, three cost-effectiveness analyses, two cost-benefit analyses, 12 cost-consequence analyses and four cost-minimization analyses. Three of the four trial-based CUAs (75%) found prehabilitation cost-effective, i.e. more effective and/or less costly than usual care. Overall, 16/25 (64.0%) EEs found prehabilitation cost-effective. When excluding studies of insufficient credibility/critical risk of bias, this number reduced to 14/23 (60.9%). In 8/25 (32.0%), cost-effectiveness was unclear, e.g. because prehabilitation was more effective and more costly, and in one EE prehabilitation was not cost-effective.ConclusionsWe found some evidence that prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery is cost-effective compared to usual preoperative care. However, we suspect a relevant risk of publication bias, and most EEs were of high risk of bias and/or low methodological quality. Furthermore, there was relevant heterogeneity depending on the population, intervention and methods. Future EEs should be performed over a longer time horizon and apply a more comprehensive perspective.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020182813.

Project description:Elective surgeries can be associated with significant harm to older adults. The present study aimed to identify the prognostic factors associated with the development of postoperative complications among older adults undergoing elective surgery.Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and AgeLine were searched for articles published between inception and April 21, 2016. Prospective studies reporting prognostic factors associated with postoperative complications (composite outcome of medical and surgical complications), functional decline, mortality, post-hospitalization discharge destination, and prolonged hospitalization among older adults undergoing elective surgery were included. Study characteristics and prognostic factors associated with the outcomes of interest were extracted independently by two reviewers. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to derive pooled effect estimates for prognostic factors and incidences of adverse outcomes.Of the 5692 titles and abstracts that were screened for inclusion, 44 studies (12,281 patients) reported on the following adverse postoperative outcomes: postoperative complications (n =28), postoperative mortality (n?=?11), length of hospitalization (n?=?21), functional decline (n?=?6), and destination at discharge from hospital (n?=?13). The pooled incidence of postoperative complications was 25.17% (95% confidence interval (CI) 18.03-33.98%, number needed to follow?=?4). The geriatric syndromes of frailty (odds ratio (OR) 2.16, 95% CI 1.29-3.62) and cognitive impairment (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.44-2.81) were associated with developing postoperative complications; however, there was no association with traditionally assessed prognostic factors such as age (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.14) or American Society of Anesthesiologists status (OR 2.62, 95% CI 0.78-8.79). Besides frailty, other potentially modifiable prognostic factors, including depressive symptoms (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.22-2.56) and smoking (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.32-4.46), were also associated with developing postoperative complications.Geriatric syndromes are important prognostic factors for postoperative complications. We identified potentially modifiable prognostic factors (e.g., frailty, depressive symptoms, and smoking) associated with developing postoperative complications that can be targeted preoperatively to optimize care.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative delirium is a common preventable complication experienced by older adults undergoing elective surgery. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified prognostic factors associated with the risk of postoperative delirium among older adults undergoing elective surgery.MethodsMedline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and AgeLine were searched for articles published between inception and April 21, 2016. A total of 5692 titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate for possible inclusion. Studies using any method for diagnosing delirium were eligible. Two reviewers independently completed all data extraction and quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to derive pooled effect estimates.ResultsForty-one studies (9384 patients) reported delirium-related prognostic factors. Among our included studies, the pooled incidence of postoperative delirium was 18.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.3-23.3%, number needed to follow [NNF] = 6). Geriatric syndromes were important predictors of delirium, namely history of delirium (odds ratio [OR] 6.4, 95% CI 2.2-17.9), frailty (OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.4-11.7), cognitive impairment (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.9-3.8), impairment in activities of daily living (ADLs; OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.6-2.6), and impairment in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs; OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.8). Potentially modifiable prognostic factors such as psychotropic medication use (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4-3.6) and smoking status (OR 1.8 95% CI 1.3-2.4) were also identified. Caregiver support was associated with lower odds of postoperative delirium (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.91).DiscussionThough caution must be used in interpreting meta-analyses of non-randomized studies due to the potential influence of unmeasured confounding, we identified potentially modifiable prognostic factors including frailty and psychotropic medication use that should be targeted to optimize care.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets