Hemodynamic, ventilatory and gas exchange responses to exercise using a cycle ergometer and the incremental shuttle walk test in pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease, including hypertension, in pregnant women is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The development of reference intervals for cardiovascular responses using exercising testing to measure oxygen utilisation (V̇O2) with cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), and distances walked using the incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT), may be promising methods to assess and stratify pregnant women regarding their risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, to encourage exercise during pregnancy, and to improve exercise prescriptions during pregnancy. We aimed to determine the reference intervals for V̇O2 at rest, anaerobic threshold (AT), and submaximal exercise using CPET, and the reference interval for the ISWT, to develop a correlation equitation that predicts submaximal V̇O2 from the distance walked in the ISWT, and to explore the relationship between hemoglobin (Hb) and ferritin concentration and V̇O2 at AT in women in second trimester. METHODS: After prospective IRB approval (HREC 15/23) and clinical trials registration (ANZCTR ACTRN12615000964516), and informed written consent, we conducted CPET and the ISWT according to international guidelines in a university associated tertiary referral obstetric and adult medicine hospital, in healthy pregnant women in second trimester (14 to 27 gestational weeks). Hemoglobin and ferritin concentrations were recorded from pathology results in the participants' medical records at the time of exercise testing. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: About 90 participants undertook CPET, 28 of which also completed the ISWT. The mean ± SD age and body mass index (BMI) were 32 ± 3.2 years, and 25 ± 2.7 kg/m2. Median (IQR) gestation was 23 (22-24) weeks. One in 4 women were 24 weeks or greater gestation. The reference intervals for V̇O2 at rest, AT, and submaximal exercise were 2.9 to 5.3, 8.1 to 20.7, and 14.1 to 30.5 mL/kg/min respectively. The reference interval for the ISWT was 218 to 1058 meters. The correlation equation to predict submaximal V̇O2 from the distance walked in the ISWT was submaximal V̇O2 (mL/kg/min) = 0.012*distance walked in ISWT (m) + 14.7 (95%CI slope 0.005-0.070, Pearson r = 0.5426 95%CI 0.2126-0.7615, P = .0029). Hemoglobin concentration was positively correlated with V̇O2 at AT (AT V̇O2 (mL/kg/min) = 0.08*Hb (g/L) + 4.9 (95%CI slope 0.0791-0.143, Pearson r = 0.2538 95%CI 0.049-0.438, P = .016). There was no linear association between ferritin and submaximal V̇O2 (Pearson r = 0.431 P = .697). There were no maternal or fetal complications. CONCLUSIONS: CPET and ISWT are safe and feasible in women in second trimester including those at or beyond 24 weeks gestation. We have established the reference interval for V̇O2 at rest, AT, and submaximal exercise by CPET, the reference interval for the distance walked for the ISWT, and a correlation equation to predict submaximal V̇O2 for use in clinical practice and research. Hemoglobin rather than ferritin is likely correlated with exercise capacity in pregnancy suggesting vigilance to correct lower hemoglobin levels may positively impact maternal health. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: The study was prospectively registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Date of registration - 15/9/2015; Date of initial participant enrolment - 4/11/2015; Clinical trial identification number; ACTRN12615000964516; URL of the registration site - https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=369216.

On the horns of a dilemma: choosing total intravenous anaesthesia or volatile anaesthesia for cancer surgery, an enduring controversy.

Two methods for administering general anaesthesia are widely used: propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (propofol-TIVA) and inhalation volatile agent-based anaesthesia. Both modalities, which have been standards of care for several decades, boast a robust safety profile. Nevertheless, the potential differential effects of these anaesthetic techniques on immediate, intermediate, and extended postoperative outcomes remain a subject of inquiry. We discuss a recently published longitudinal analysis stemming from a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing sevoflurane-based inhalation anaesthesia with propofol-TIVA in older patients with cancer, which showed a reduced incidence of emergence and postoperative delirium, comparable postoperative complication rates within 30 days after surgery, and comparable long-term survival rates. We undertake an assessment of the trial's methodological strengths and limitations, contextualise its results within the broader scientific evidence, and explore avenues for resolving the extant controversies in anaesthetic choice for cancer surgery. We aim to pave the way for the incorporation of precision medicine paradigms into the evolving landscape of perioperative care for patients with cancer.

Patients' and carers' views on research priorities in prehabilitation for cancer surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The views of patients and carers are important for the development of research priorities. This study aimed to determine and compare the top research priorities of cancer patients and carers with those of multidisciplinary clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study surveyed patients recovering from cancer surgery at a major tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia, and/or their carers between March and July 2023. Consenting patients and carers were provided a list of research priorities according to clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation, as determined in a recent International Delphi study. Participants were asked to rate the importance of each research priority using a 5-item Likert scale (ranging from 1 = very high research priority to 5 = very low research priority). RESULTS: A total of 101 patients and 50 carers participated in this study. Four areas were identified as research priorities, achieving consensus of highest importance (> 70% rated as "high" or "very high" priority) by patients, carers, and clinical experts. These were "optimal composition of prehabilitation programs" (77% vs. 82% vs. 88%), "effect of prehabilitation on surgical outcomes" (85% vs. 90% vs. 95%), "effect of prehabilitation on functional outcomes" (83% vs. 86% vs. 79%), and "effect of prehabilitation on patient reported outcomes" (78% vs. 84% vs. 79%). Priorities that did not reach consensus of high importance by patients despite reaching consensus of highest importance by experts included "identifying populations most likely to benefit from prehabilitation" (70% vs. 76% vs. 90%) and "defining prehabilitation core outcome measures" (66% vs. 74% vs. 87%). "Prehabilitation during neoadjuvant therapies" reached consensus of high importance by patients but not by experts or carers (81% vs. 68% vs. 69%). CONCLUSION: This study delineated the primary prehabilitation research priorities as determined by patients and carers, against those previously identified by clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation. It is recommended that subsequent high-quality research and resource allocation be directed towards these highlighted areas of importance.

The Impact of Peri-operative Enteral Immunonutrition on Post-operative Complications in Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Immunonutrition (IMN) in gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery remains under-utilised and contentious. Despite previous meta-analysis reporting benefit, most recent randomised control trials (RCTs) have failed to demonstrate this and have recommended against its routine use. A contemporary meta-analysis may contribute to the recommendations for immunonutrition use and help select which patients may benefit. The objective of this study was to review IMN and its impact on post-operative outcomes in GI cancer surgery, exploring its role in both malnourished and non-malnourished populations, the optimal dose to use, cancer type of patients using IMN and the timing of IMN relative to the peri-operative period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The EMBASE and Medline databases were searched from 2000 to 2022 for RCTs evaluating IMN in adults undergoing GI cancer surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies were included (22 pre-operative IMN studies, 11 peri-operative IMN trials and 9 post-operative IMN trials; 4 trials had multiple IMN protocols) that reported on 3793 patients. The main outcome of post-operative infectious complications was reduced with IMN [odds ratio (OR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.72]. This association was significant in subgroup analysis only with pre-operative and peri-operative administration and in trials including upper GI cancers, colorectal cancer and 'mixed GI' cancer populations, and significance was independent of nutritional status. IMN in pooled analysis reduced surgical site infection (SSI) (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52-0.81), anastomotic leak (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.93) and length of stay (LOS) by 1.94 days (95% CI - 3 to - 0.87). CONCLUSION: Immunonutrition was associated with reduced post-operative complications. Peri-operative administration may be the preferred strategy in reducing infectious complications, anastomotic leak, SSI and LOS.

Trajectory of plasma syndecan-1 and heparan sulphate during major surgery: A retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical trauma-induced inflammation during major surgery may disrupt endothelial integrity and affect plasma concentrations of glycocalyx constituents, such as syndecan-1 and heparan sulphate. To date, no studies have focused on their perioperative temporal changes. METHODS: As part of a trial, we obtained plasma and urine specimens sampled during the perioperative period in 72 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The plasma concentration of syndecan-1 and heparan sulphate was measured on five occasions, from baseline to the second postoperative day. Plasma and urinary creatinine and urinary syndecan-1 concentrations were measured before surgery and on the first postoperative morning. RESULTS: We observed three different temporal patterns of plasma syndecan-1 concentration. Group 1 'low' (64% of patients) showed only minor changes from baseline despite a median heparan sulphate increase of 67% (p < .005). Group 2 'increase' (21% of patients) showed a marked increase in median plasma syndecan-1 from 27 µg/L to 118 µg/L during the first postoperative day (p < .001) with a substantial (+670%; p < .005) increase in median plasma heparan sulphate from 279 to 2196 µg/L. Group 3 'high' (14% of patients) showed a constant elevation of plasma syndecan-1 to >100 µg/L, but low heparan sulphate levels. The plasma C-reactive protein concentration did not differ across the three groups and 90% of colon surgeries occurred in Group 1. Treatment with dexamethasone was similar across the three groups. Surgical blood loss, duration of surgery and liver resection were greatest in Group 2. CONCLUSION: Changes in syndecan-1 and heparan sulphate after surgery appear to show three different patterns, with the greatest increases in those patients with greater blood loss, more liver surgery and longer operations. These observations suggest that increases in syndecan-1 and heparan sulphate reflect the degree of surgical injury.

PRehabIlitatiOn with pReoperatIve exercise and educaTion for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgerY: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled TRIAL (PRIORITY TRIAL).

BACKGROUND: Radical surgery is the mainstream treatment for patients presenting with advanced primary or recurrent gastrointestinal cancers; however, the rate of postoperative complications is exceptionally high. The current evidence suggests that improving patients' fitness during the preoperative period may enhance postoperative recovery. Thus, the primary aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of prehabilitation with a progressive, individualised, preoperative exercise and education program compared to usual care alone in reducing the proportion of patients with postoperative in-hospital complications. The secondary aims are to investigate the effectiveness of the preoperative intervention on reducing the length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, improving quality of life and morbidity, and reducing costs. METHODS: This is a multi-centre, assessor-blinded, pragmatic, comparative, randomised controlled trial. A total of 172 patients undergoing pelvic exenteration, cytoreductive surgery, oesophagectomy, hepatectomy, gastrectomy or pancreatectomy will be recruited. Participants will be randomly allocated to prehabilitation with a preoperative exercise and education program (intervention group), delivered over 4 to 8 weeks before surgery by community physiotherapists/exercise physiologists, or usual care alone (control group). The intervention will comprise 12 to 24 individualised, progressive exercise sessions (including aerobic/anaerobic, resistance, and respiratory exercises), recommendations of home exercises (16 to 32 sessions), and daily incidental physical activity advice. Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, the week prior to surgery, during the hospital stay, and on the day of discharge from hospital, and 1 month and 1 months postoperatively. The primary outcome will be the development of in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes include the length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, quality of life, postoperative morbidity and costs. DISCUSSION: The successful completion of this trial will provide robust and high-quality evidence on the efficacy of a preoperative community- and home-based exercise and education intervention on important postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing major gastrointestinal cancer surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered prospectively with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12621000617864 ) on 24th May 2021.

Current approaches to acute postoperative pain management after major abdominal surgery: a narrative review and future directions.

Poorly controlled postoperative pain is associated with increased morbidity, negatively affects quality of life and functional recovery, and is a risk factor for persistent pain and longer-term opioid use. Up to 10% of opioid-naïve patients have persistent opioid use after many types of surgeries. Opioid-related side-effects and the opioid abuse epidemic emphasise the need for alternative, opioid-minimising, multimodal analgesic strategies, including neuraxial (epidural/intrathecal) techniques, truncal nerve blocks, and lidocaine infusions. The preference for minimally invasive surgical techniques has changed anaesthetic and analgesic requirements in abdominal surgery compared with open laparotomy, leading to a decline in popularity of epidural anaesthesia and an increasing interest in intrathecal morphine and truncal nerve blocks. Limited research exists on patient quality of recovery using specific analgesic techniques after intra-abdominal surgery. Poorly controlled postoperative pain after major abdominal surgery should be a research priority as it affects patient-centred short-term and long-term outcomes (including quality of life scores, return to function measurements, disability-free survival) and has broad community health and economic implications.

On the horns of a dilemma: choosing total intravenous anaesthesia or volatile anaesthesia.

There are two established techniques of delivering general anaesthesia: propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) and volatile agent-based inhaled anaesthesia. Both techniques are offered as standard of care and have an established safety track record lasting more than 30 years. However, it is not currently known whether the choice of anaesthetic technique results in a fundamentally different patient experience or affects early, intermediate-term, and longer-term postoperative outcomes. This editorial comments on a recently published study that suggests that inhaled volatile anaesthesia might be associated with fewer postoperative surgical complications than propofol-based TIVA for patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. We consider the strengths and limitations of the study, place these findings in the context of the broader evidence, and discuss how the current controversies regarding anaesthetic technique can be resolved, thereby helping to bring precision medicine into the modern practice of perioperative care.

A simplified (modified) Duke Activity Status Index (M-DASI) to characterise functional capacity: a secondary analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate assessment of functional capacity, a predictor of postoperative morbidity and mortality, is essential to improving surgical planning and outcomes. We assessed if all 12 items of the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) were equally important in reflecting exercise capacity. METHODS: In this secondary cross-sectional analysis of the international, multicentre Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study, we assessed cardiopulmonary exercise testing and DASI data from 1455 participants. Multivariable regression analyses were used to revise the DASI model in predicting an anaerobic threshold (AT) >11 ml kg-1 min-1 and peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak) >16 ml kg-1 min-1, cut-points that represent a reduced risk of postoperative complications. RESULTS: Five questions were identified to have dominance in predicting AT>11 ml kg-1 min-1 and VO2 peak>16 ml.kg-1min-1. These items were included in the M-DASI-5Q and retained utility in predicting AT>11 ml.kg-1.min-1 (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic [AUROC]-AT: M-DASI-5Q=0.67 vs original 12-question DASI=0.66) and VO2 peak (AUROC-VO2 peak: M-DASI-5Q 0.73 vs original 12-question DASI 0.71). Conversely, in a sensitivity analysis we removed one potentially sensitive question related to the ability to have sexual relations, and the ability of the remaining four questions (M-DASI-4Q) to predict an adequate functional threshold remained no worse than the original 12-question DASI model. Adding a dynamic component to the M-DASI-4Q by assessing the chronotropic response to exercise improved its ability to discriminate between those with VO2 peak>16 ml.kg-1.min-1 and VO2 peak<16 ml.kg-1.min-1. CONCLUSIONS: The M-DASI provides a simple screening tool for further preoperative evaluation, including with cardiopulmonary exercise testing, to guide perioperative management.

Patient acceptance of prehabilitation for major surgery: an exploratory survey.

PURPOSE: Prehabilitation programs are effective in optimising patient's functional reserve prior to surgery and increasingly associated with reduced postoperative complications. However, acceptability of programs among patients is largely unknown. This study set out to explore the acceptability of prehabilitation from the perspective of patients awaiting major cancer surgery. METHODS: Adult patients awaiting major gastrointestinal and urological cancer surgeries were surveyed. Patients were excluded if they were unable to complete the survey due to language, intellectual impairment and/or visual/hearing deficit. The survey was designed to explore categories related to patient demographics, level of physical activity and perceived enablers and barriers to prehabilitation. RESULTS: One hundred and three participants presenting to a pre-anaesthesia clinic completed the survey over a 5-month period, with 83% response rate. Approximately, half of the respondents were female (55%) and were currently physically active (53%). Fewer than one third (30%) felt they completed 'enough exercise'. The majority of participants (83%) were unfamiliar with the concept of prehabilitation but two thirds (68%) were interested in such a program after explanation. The majority of participants (72%) indicated a strong preference to exercise in a home-based environment. Medical recommendation increased willingness to participate (p < 0.001), while program costs (p = 0.01) were potential barriers to participation. CONCLUSION: Patients are willing to participate in prehabilitation prior to major cancer surgery but practical barriers and facilitators should be considered when designing prehabilitation programs to maximise patient commitment to facilitate improved postoperative outcomes.

A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, Blinded End Point, Phase 2, Feasibility, Efficacy, and Safety Trial of Preoperative Microvascular Protection in Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The endothelial glycocalyx, a carbohydrate-rich layer coating all endothelial surfaces, plays a fundamental role in the function of microcirculation. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using dexamethasone and albumin to protect the endothelial glycocalyx in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included efficacy and safety. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, blinded end point, phase 2, randomized trial. Patients undergoing colorectal, pancreas, or liver surgery were recruited and randomized to receive either intravenous dexamethasone (16 mg) and 20% albumin (100 mL) at induction of anesthesia, then 200 mL of 20% albumin with each subsequent 1000 mL of crystalloid administered (dexamethasone and albumin [Dex-Alb] group), or crystalloid fluid only with no dexamethasone (control group). Feasibility end points included patient recruitment and retention, consent rate, and successful study drug administration. The primary efficacy end point was the measurement of plasma syndecan-1 level on postoperative day (POD) 1, and secondary end points were heparan sulfate levels and inflammatory markers measured at 4 perioperative timepoints. Safety end points included errors in administration of the intervention, hyperglycemia, occurrence of postoperative complications, and patient retention. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were randomized. All feasibility end points were achievable. There were no statistically significant differences observed in median (interquartile range) syndecan-1 levels on POD 1 (39 ng·mL-1 [20-97] in the Dex-Alb group versus 41 ng·mL-1 [19-84] in the control group; difference in medians -2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI], -13 to 8.6; P = .69). The Dex-Alb group had lower POD 1 heparan sulfate levels (319 ng·mL-1 [161-717] in the Dex-Alb group versus 1422 [670-2430] ng·mL-1 in the control group; difference in medians -1085, 95% CI, -1779 to -391) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on POD 1 (48 [29-77] mg·L-1 in the Dex-Alb group versus 85 mg·L-1 [49-133] in the control group; difference in medians -48, 95% CI, -75 to -21). Fewer patients had one or more postoperative complication in the Dex-Alb group than in the control group (6 [17%] vs 18 patients [50%]; odds ratio = 0.2, 95% CI, 0.06-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous dexamethasone and albumin administration was feasible but did not reduce syndecan-1 on POD 1 in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Given the clinically important CIs observed between the groups for heparan sulfate, CRP, and postoperative complications, a larger trial assessing the associations between dexamethasone and albumin administration and these outcomes is warranted.

Impaired vascular endothelial function as a perioperative risk predictor - a prospective observational trial.

BACKGROUND: In the recent years, an increasing number of patients with multiple comorbidities (e.g. coronary artery disease, diabetes, hypertension) presents to the operating room. The clinical risk factors are accompanied by underlying vascular-endothelial dysfunction, which impairs microcirculation and may predispose to end-organ dysfunction and impaired postoperative outcome. Whether preoperative endothelial dysfunction identifies patients at risk of postoperative complications remains unclear. In this prospective observational study, we tested the hypothesis that impaired flow-mediated dilation (FMD), a non-invasive surrogate marker of endothelial function, correlates with Days at Home within 30 days after surgery (DAH30). DAH30 is a patient-centric metric that captures postoperative complications and importantly also hospital re-admissions. METHODS: Seventy-one patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were enrolled. FMD was performed pre-operatively prior to major abdominal surgery and patients were dichotomised at a threshold value of 10%. FMD was then correlated with DAH30 (primary endpoint) and postoperative complications (secondary endpoints). RESULTS: DAH30 did not differ between patients with reduced FMD and normal FMD (14 (4) (median (IQR)) vs. 15 (8), P = 0.8). Similary, no differences between both groups were found for CCI (normal FMD: 21 (30) (median (IQR)), reduced FMD: 26 (38), P = 0.4) or frequency of major complications (normal FMD: 7 (19%) (n (%)), reduced FMD: 12 (35%), P = 0.12). The regression analyses revealed that FMD in combination with ASA status and surgery duration had no additional significant predictive effect for DAH30, CCI or Clavien-Dindo score. CONCLUSION: FMD does not add predictive value with regards to DAH30, CCI or Clavien-Dindo score within our study cohort of patients undergoing abdominal surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00005472 ), prospectively registered on 25/11/2013.

Implementing a telehealth prehabilitation education session for patients preparing for major cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation services assist patients in preparing for surgery, yet access to these services are often limited by geographical factors. Enabling rural and regional patients to access specialist surgical prehabilitation support with the use of telehealth technology has the potential to overcome health inequities and improve post-operative outcomes. AIM: To evaluate the current and likely future impact of a telehealth preoperative education package for patients preparing for major abdominal cancer surgery. METHODS: A telehealth alternative to a hospital based pre-operative education session was developed and implemented at a dedicated cancer hospital. Adult patients (≥18 years) scheduled for elective major cancer surgery were offered this telehealth alternative. Impact evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework. RESULTS: To date, 35 participants have consented to participate in the study. Thirty-one participants attended the intervention; 24 (69%) residing in rural or regional areas. Twenty-four (77%) reported that if given a choice they would prefer the online session as opposed to attending the hospital in person. The majority (97%) reported they would recommend the intervention to others preparing for surgery. Session information was recalled by all 26 participants and 77% of participants reported acting on recommendations 2 weeks after the session. Lessons learnt and recommendations for providers implementing similar programs are reported. CONCLUSION: Telehealth alternatives to hospital based pre-operative education are well received by patients preparing for major cancer surgery. We make seven recommendations to improve implementation. Further evaluation of implementation strategies alongside clinical effectiveness in future studies is essential. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620000096954 , 04/02/2020.

Anesthetic technique and cancer surgery outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Surgery remains integral to treating solid cancers. However, the surgical stress response, characterized by physiologic perturbation of the adrenergic, inflammatory, and immune systems, may promote procancerous pathways. Anesthetic technique per se may attenuate/enhance these pathways and thereby could be implicated in long-term cancer outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: To date, clinical studies have predominantly been retrospective and underpowered and, thus limit meaningful conclusions. More recently, prospective studies of regional anesthesia for breast and colorectal cancer surgery have failed to demonstrate long-term cancer outcome benefit. However, based on the consistent observation of protumorigenic effects of surgical stress and that of volatile anesthesia in preclinical studies, supported by in vivo models of tumor progression and metastasis, we await robust prospective clinical studies exploring the role of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (cf. inhalational volatiles). Additionally, anti-adrenergic/anti-inflammatory adjuncts, such as lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the anti-adrenergic propranolol warrant ongoing research. SUMMARY: The biologic perturbation of the perioperative period, compounded by the effects of anesthetic agents, renders patients with cancer particularly vulnerable to enhanced viability of minimal residual disease, with long-term outcome consequences. However, low level and often conflicting clinical evidence equipoise currently exists with regards to optimal oncoanesthesia techniques. Large, prospective, randomized control trials are urgently needed to inform evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

Anesthetic technique and cancer outcomes: a meta-analysis of total intravenous versus volatile anesthesia.

PURPOSE: Cancer-related mortality, a leading cause of death worldwide, is often the result of metastatic disease recurrence. Anesthetic techniques have varying effects on innate and cellular immunity, activation of adrenergic-inflammatory pathways, and activation of cancer-promoting cellular signaling pathways; these effects may translate into an influence of anesthetic technique on long-term cancer outcomes. To further analyze the effects of propofol (intravenous) and volatile (inhalational gas) anesthesia on cancer recurrence and survival, we undertook a systematic review with meta-analysis. SOURCE: Databases were searched up to 14 November 2018. Comparative studies examining the effect of inhalational volatile anesthesia and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) on cancer outcomes were included. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess methodological quality and bias. Reported hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Ten studies were included; six studies examined the effect of anesthetic agent type on recurrence-free survival following breast, esophageal, and non-small cell lung cancer (n = 7,866). The use of TIVA was associated with improved recurrence-free survival in all cancer types (pooled HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.94; P < 0.01). Eight studies (n = 18,778) explored the effect of anesthetic agent type on overall survival, with TIVA use associated with improved overall survival (pooled HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.92; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that propofol-TIVA use may be associated with improved recurrence-free survival and overall survival in patients having cancer surgery. This is especially evident where major cancer surgery was undertaken. Nevertheless, given the inherent limitations of studies included in this meta-analysis these findings necessitate prospective randomized trials to guide clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42018081478); registered 8 October, 2018.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La mortalité liée au cancer, une cause majeure de décès dans le monde entier, est bien souvent le résultat de la récurrence de la maladie métastatique. Les techniques anesthésiques ont des effets variés sur l'immunité naturelle et cellulaire, l'activation des voies adrénergiques inflammatoires, et l'activation des voies de signalisation cellulaire promouvant le cancer; ces effets pourraient se traduire dans une influence de la technique anesthésique sur les pronostics de cancer à long terme. Afin d'approfondir l'analyse des effets de l'anesthésie au propofol (voie intraveineuse) et par inhalation (gaz) sur la récurrence du cancer et la survie, nous avons entrepris une revue systématique avec méta-analyse. SOURCE: Nous avons réalisé des recherches dans les bases de données jusqu'au 14 novembre 2018. Les études comparatives examinant l'effet d'une anesthésie par inhalation et d'une anesthésie intraveineuse totale (TIVA) avec propofol sur les pronostics de cancer ont été incluses dans notre revue. L'échelle de Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) a été utilisée pour évaluer la qualité méthodologique et le biais. Les rapports de risque (RR) rapportés ont été pondérés et les intervalles de confiance (IC) à 95 % calculés. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Dix études ont été incluses; six études ont examiné l'effet du type d'agent anesthésique sur la survie sans récurrence après un cancer du sein, de l'œsophage et du cancer pulmonaire non à petites cellules (n = 7866). L'utilisation d'une TIVA était associée à une amélioration de la survie sans récurrence, tous types de cancer confondus (RR pondéré, 0,78; IC 95 %, 0,65 à 0,94; P < 0,01). Huit études (n = 18 778) ont exploré l'effet du type d'agent anesthésique sur la survie globale, l'utilisation d'une TIVA étant alors associée à une amélioration de la survie globale (RR pondéré, 0,76; IC 95 %, 0,63 à 0,92; P < 0,01). CONCLUSION: Cette méta-analyse suggère que l'administration d'une TIVA à base de propofol pourrait être associée à une amélioration de la survie sans récurrence et de la survie globale chez les patients subissant une chirurgie oncologique. Cette observation est particulièrement frappante dans les cas de chirurgie oncologique majeure. Toutefois, étant donné les lacunes inhérentes des études incluses dans cette méta-analyse, ces résultats nécessitent la réalisation d'études randomisées prospectives afin d'éclairer la pratique clinique. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: PROSPERO (CRD42018081478); enregistrée le 8 octobre 2018.

Correction to: Anesthetic technique and cancer outcomes: a meta-analysis of total intravenous versus volatile anesthesia.

There was an isolated error relating to the Oh et al. study (1) within our recurrence-free survival analysis. When the reported estimates for Oh et al. are corrected, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) is now 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.66 to 1.15; P=0.32.

A cross-sectional survey of Australian anesthetists' and surgeons' perceptions of preoperative risk stratification and prehabilitation.

PURPOSE: Preoperative fitness training has been listed as a top ten research priority in anesthesia. We aimed to capture the current practice patterns and perspectives of anesthetists and colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand regarding preoperative risk stratification and prehabilitation to provide a basis for implementation research. METHODS: During 2016, we separately surveyed fellows of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) and members of the Colorectal Society of Surgeons in Australia and New Zealand (CSSANZ). Our outcome measures investigated the responders' demographics, practice patterns, and perspectives. Practice patterns examined preoperative assessment and prehabilitation utilizing exercise, hematinic, and nutrition optimization. RESULTS: We received 155 responses from anesthetists and 71 responses from colorectal surgeons. We found that both specialty groups recognized that functional capacity was linked to postoperative outcome; however, fewer agreed that robust evidence exists for prehabilitation. Prehabilitation in routine practice remains low, with significant potential for expansion. The majority of anesthetists do not believe their patients are adequately risk stratified before surgery, and most of their colorectal colleagues are amenable to delaying surgery for at least an additional two weeks. Two-thirds of anesthetists did not use cardiopulmonary exercise testing as they lacked access. Hematinic and nutritional assessment and optimization is less frequently performed by anesthetists compared with their colorectal colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: An unrecognized potential window for prehabilitation exists in the two to four weeks following cancer diagnosis. Early referral, larger multi-centre studies focusing on long-term outcomes, and further implementation research are required.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le conditionnement physique préopératoire a été cité dans les dix priorités de recherche les plus importantes en anesthésie. Notre objectif était de déterminer quels étaient les habitudes actuelles de pratique ainsi que les perspectives des anesthésistes et des chirurgiens colorectaux en Australie et en Nouvelle-Zélande concernant la stratification préopératoire du risque et la préhabilitation afin de proposer un point de départ pour la recherche sur sa mise en œuvre. MéTHODE: Au cours de l'année 2016, nous avons soumis un questionnaire séparé aux membres du Collège australien et néozélandais des anesthésistes (ANZCA - Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists) et aux membres de la Société colorectale des chirurgiens australiens et néozélandais (CSSANZ - Colorectal Society of Surgeons in Australia and New Zealand). Nos critères d'évaluation portaient sur les données démographiques, les habitudes de pratique et les perspectives des répondants. Les questions sur les habitudes de pratique touchaient à l'évaluation préopératoire et la préhabilitation fondée sur l'exercice physique et l'optimisation antianémique et nutritionnelle. RéSULTATS: Nous avons reçu 155 réponses d'anesthésistes et 71 réponses de chirurgiens colorectaux. Notre questionnaire a révélé que les deux spécialités reconnaissaient que la capacité fonctionnelle est liée au pronostic postopératoire; toutefois, moins de répondants étaient d'avis qu'il existe des données probantes fiables concernant la préhabilitation. Dans la pratique de routine, la préhabilitation demeure peu courante mais a le potentiel de prendre plus d'ampleur. La plupart des anesthésistes estiment que leurs patients ne sont pas stratifiés adéquatement en fonction de leur risque avant leur chirurgie, et la plupart de leurs collègues colorectaux sont ouverts à l'idée de retarder la chirurgie d'au moins deux semaines supplémentaires. Deux tiers des anesthésiologistes n'ont pas eu recours à un test d'effort cardiopulmonaire par manque d'accès à ce type d'examen. L'évaluation et l'optimisation antianémique et nutritionnelle sont moins fréquemment réalisées par les anesthésistes comparativement à leurs collègues colorectaux. CONCLUSION: Il existe une fenêtre potentielle mais non reconnue pour la mise en œuvre d'une préhabilitation au cours des deux à quatre semaines suivant l'annonce d'un diagnostic de cancer. Une prise en charge précoce par des spécialistes, des études multicentriques plus importantes s'intéressant aux pronostics à long terme et des travaux de recherche supplémentaires sur la mise en œuvre sont nécessaires.

Multimodal Prehabilitation Programs as a Bundle of Care in Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation reflects a proactive process of preoperative optimization undertaken between cancer diagnosis and definitive surgical treatment, with the intent of improving physiological capacity to withstand the major insult of surgery. Prehabilitation before GI cancer surgery is currently not widely adopted, and most research has focused on unimodal interventions such as exercise therapy, nutritional supplementation, and hematinic optimization. A review of the existing literature was undertaken to investigate the impact of multimodal prehabilitation programs as a "bundle of care." DATA SOURCE: A systematic literature search was performed utilizing Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases. STUDY SELECTION: The quality of studies was assessed by using the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias (randomized trials) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale (cohort studies). INTERVENTION: Studies were chosen that involved pre-operative optimization of patients before GI cancer surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measured was the impact of prehabilitation programs on preoperative fitness and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 544 studies identified, 20 were included in the qualitative analysis. Two trials investigated the impact of multimodal prehabilitation (exercise, nutritional supplementation, anxiety management). Trials exploring prehabilitation with unimodal interventions included impact of exercise therapy (7 trials), impact of preoperative iron replacement (5 trials), nutritional optimization (5 trials), and impact of preoperative smoking cessation (2 trials). Compliance within the identified studies was variable (range: 16%-100%). LIMITATIONS: There is a lack of adequately powered trials that utilize objective risk stratification and uniform end points. As such, a meta-analysis was not performed because of the heterogeneity in study design. CONCLUSION: Although small studies are supportive of multimodal interventions, there are insufficient data to make a conclusion about the integration of prehabilitation in GI cancer surgery as a bundle of care. Larger, prospective trials, utilizing uniform objective risk stratification and structured interventions, with predefined clinical and health economic end points, are required before definitive value can be assigned to prehabilitation programs.