Prehabilitation for surgical oncology patients: empowering patient volition.

Prehabilitation is the improvement of patient health in anticipation of a physiological stressor, such as major surgery. Prehabilitation optimizes health by taking a proactive approach to promoting exercise, nutrition, and lifestyle modifications. Engaging patients in the pre-operative phase provides an opportunity to positively impact their recovery and return to functional baseline by reducing post-operative deconditioning. At the Odette Cancer Centre at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, Canada, the Interprofessional Multidisciplinary Prehabilitation Assessment Consultation Team (IMPACT-Surgical Oncology) was developed. The program was initiated in January 2015 and assesses approximately 3-5 patients/week (with a total of over 250 patients so far). This program offers patients individualized pre-operative assessments, including medical optimization, functional, and nutritional assessments, as well as counseling for mood-related issues, smoking/alcohol cessation, and preparing for surgery (such as ensuring adequate home supports/functional equipment prior to surgery). By providing holistic, person-centered, individualized pre-operative optimization strategies, patients and families feel empowered, motivated, and in control of their own health.

Understanding Perioperative Transfusion Practices in Gastrointestinal Surgery-a Practice Survey of General Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Despite guidelines recommending restrictive red blood cell transfusion (RBCT) strategies, perioperative transfusion practices still vary significantly. To understand the underlying mechanisms that lead to gaps in practice, we sought to assess the attitudes of surgeons regarding the perioperative management of anemia and use of RBCT in patients having gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: We conducted a self-administered Web-based survey of general surgery staff and residents, in a network of eight academic institutions at the University of Toronto. We developed a questionnaire using a systematic approach of items generation and reduction. We tested face and content validity and test-retest reliability. We administered the survey via emails, with planned reminders. RESULTS: Total response rate was 48.1 % (62/125). Half (51.0 %) of respondents stated that they were unlikely to conduct a preoperative anemia work-up. About 54.0 % reported ordering preoperative oral iron supplementation for anemia. Most respondents indicated using a 70 g/L hemoglobin trigger (92.0 %) for transfusion. Factors increasing thresholds above 70 g/L included cardiac comorbidity (58.0 %), acute cardiac disease (94.0 %), symptomatic anemia (68.0 %), and suspected bleeding (58.0 %). With those factors, the transfusion threshold often increased above 90 g/L. Respondents perceived RBCTs to increase the postoperative morbidity (62 %), but not to impact the mortality (48 %) and cancer recurrence (52 %). Institutional protocols (68.0 %), blood conservation clinics (44.0 %), and clinical practice guidelines (84.0 %) were believed to encourage restrictive use of RBCTs. CONCLUSION: Self-reported perioperative transfusion practices for GI surgery are heterogeneous. Few respondents investigated preoperative anemia. Stated use of RBCT indications varied from recommendations in published guidelines for patients with symptomatic anemia. Establishing team consensus and implementing local blood management guidelines appear necessary to improve uptake of evidence-based recommendations.

The impact of perioperative iron on the use of red blood cell transfusions in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Perioperative anemia is common, yet detrimental, in surgical patients. However, red blood cell transfusions (RBCTs) used to treat anemia are associated with significant postoperative risks and worse oncologic outcomes. Perioperative iron has been suggested to mitigate perioperative anemia. This meta-analysis examined the impact of perioperative iron compared to no intervention on the need for RBCT in gastrointestinal surgery. We systematically searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Scopus to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies (NRSs). We excluded studies investigating autologous RBCT or erythropoietin. Two independent reviewers selected the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Primary outcomes were proportion of patients getting allogeneic RBCT and number of transfused patient. Secondary outcomes were hemoglobin change, 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality, length of stay, and oncologic outcomes. A meta-analysis using random effects models was performed. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42013004805). From 883 citations, we included 2 RCTs and 2 NRSs (n = 325 patients), all pertaining to colorectal cancer surgery. Randomized controlled trials were at high risk for bias and underpowered. One RCT and 1 NRS using preoperative oral iron reported a decreased proportion of patients needing RBCT. One RCT on preoperative intravenous iron and 1 NRS on postoperative PO iron did not observe a difference. Only 1 study revealed a difference in number of transfused patients. One RCT reported significantly increased postintervention hemoglobin. Among 3 studies reporting length of stay, none observed a difference. Other secondary outcomes were not reported. Meta-analysis revealed a trend toward fewer patients requiring RBCT with iron supplementation (risk ratio, 0.66 [0.42, 1.02]), but no benefit on the number of RBCT per patient (weighted mean difference, -0.91 [-1.61, -0.18]). Although preliminary evidence suggests that it may be a promising strategy, there is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of perioperative iron to decrease the need for RBCT in colorectal cancer surgery. Well-designed RCTs focusing on the need for RBCT and including long-term outcomes are warranted.

Medial open transversus abdominis plane (MOTAP) catheters for analgesia following open liver resection: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The current standard for pain control following liver surgery is intravenous, patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) or epidural analgesia. We have developed a modification of a regional technique called medial open transversus abdominis plane (MOTAP) catheter analgesia. The MOTAP technique involves surgically placed catheters through the open surgical site into a plane between the internal oblique muscle and the transverse abdominis muscle superiorly. The objective of this trial is to assess the efficacy of this technique. METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol describes a multicentre, prospective, blinded, randomized controlled trial. One hundred and twenty patients scheduled for open liver resection through a subcostal incision will be enrolled. All patients will have two MOTAP catheters placed at the conclusion of surgery. Patients will be randomized to one of two parallel groups: experimental (local anaesthetic through MOTAP catheters) or placebo (normal saline through MOTAP catheters). Both groups will also receive IV PCA. The primary endpoint is mean cumulative postoperative opioid consumption over the first 2 postoperative days (48 hours). Secondary outcomes include pain intensity, patient functional outcomes, and the incidence of complications. DISCUSSION: This trial has been approved by the ethics boards at participating centres and is currently enrolling patients. Data collection will be completed by the end of 2014 with analysis mid-2015 and publication by the end of 2015. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with http://clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01960049; 23 September 2013).