Treatment interval in curative treatment of colon cancer, does it impact (cancer free) survival? A non-inferiority analysis.

BACKGROUND: In treatment of colon cancer, strict waiting-time targets are enforced, leaving professionals no room to lengthen treatment intervals when advisable, for instance to optimise a patient's health status by means of prehabilitation. Good quality studies supporting these targets are lacking. With this study we aim to establish whether a prolonged treatment interval is associated with a clinically relevant deterioration in overall and cancer free survival. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter non-inferiority study includes all consecutive patients who underwent elective oncological resection of a biopsy-proven primary non-metastatic colon carcinoma between 2010 and 2016 in six hospitals in the Southern Netherlands. Treatment interval was defined as time between diagnosis and surgical treatment. Cut-off points for treatment interval were ≤35 days and ≤49 days. FINDINGS: 3376 patients were included. Cancer recurred in 505 patients (15.0%) For cancer free survival, a treatment interval >35 days and >49 days was non-inferior to a treatment interval ≤35 days. Results for overall survival were inconclusive, but no association was found. CONCLUSION: For cancer free survival, a prolonged treatment interval, even over 49 days, is non-inferior to the currently set waiting-time target of ≤35 days. Therefore, the waiting-time targets set as fundamental objective in current treatment guidelines should become directional instead of strict targets.

Multimodal prehabilitation in elective oncological colorectal surgery enhances preoperative physical fitness: a single center prospective real-world data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgery can lead to curation in colorectal cancer (CRC) but is associated with significant morbidity. Prehabilitation plays an important role in increasing preoperative physical fitness to reduce morbidity risk; however, data from real-world practice is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the change in preoperative physical fitness and to evaluate which patients benefit most from prehabilitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-arm prospective cohort study, consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal oncological surgery were offered a 3- to 4-week multimodal prehabilitation program (supervised physical exercise training, dietary consultation, protein and vitamin supplementation, smoking cessation, and psychological support). The primary outcome was the change in preoperative aerobic fitness (steep ramp test (SRT)). Secondary outcomes were the change in functional walking capacity (6-minute walk test (6MWT)), and muscle strength (one-repetition maximum (1RM) for various muscle groups). To evaluate who benefit most from prehabilitation, participants were divided in quartiles (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) based on baseline performance. RESULTS: In total, 101 patients participated (51.4% male, aged 69.7 ± 12.7 years). The preoperative change in SRT was +28.3 W, +0.36 W/kg, +16.7% (P<0.001). Patients in all quartiles improved at the group level; however, the relative improvement decreased from Q1-Q2, Q2-Q3, and Q3-Q4 (P=0.049). Change in 6MWT was +37.5 m, +7.7% (P<0.001) and 1RM improved with 5.6-33.2 kg, 16.1-32.5% for the various muscle groups (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Prehabilitation in elective oncological colorectal surgery is associated with enhanced preoperative physical fitness regardless of baseline performance. Improvements were relatively larger in less fit patients.

Prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation to improve functional capacity, reduce postoperative complications and improve quality of life in colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the cornerstone in curative treatment of colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, surgery itself can adversely affect patient health. 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' programmes, which include multimodal interventions, have improved patient outcomes substantially. However, these are mainly applied peri- and postoperatively. Multimodal prehabilitation includes multiple preoperative interventions to prepare patients for surgery with the aim of increasing resilience, thereby improving postoperative outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of multimodal prehabilitation programmes on functional capacity, postoperative complications, and quality of life in adult patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO in January 2021. We also searched trial registries up to March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for surgery, comparing multimodal prehabilitation programmes (defined as comprising at least two preoperative interventions) with no prehabilitation. We focused on the following outcomes: functional capacity (i.e. 6-minute walk test, VO2peak, handgrip strength), postoperative outcomes (i.e. complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, emergency department visits, re-admissions), health-related quality of life, compliance, safety of prehabilitation, and return to normal activities. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Any disagreements were solved with discussion and consensus. We pooled data to perform meta-analyses, where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs that enrolled 250 participants with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for elective (mainly laparoscopic) surgery. Included trials were conducted in tertiary care centres and recruited patients during periods ranging from 17 months to 45 months. A total of 130 participants enrolled in a preoperative four-week trimodal prehabilitation programme consisting of exercise, nutritional intervention, and anxiety reduction techniques. Outcomes of these participants were compared to those of 120 participants who started an identical but postoperative programme. Postoperatively, prehabilitation may improve functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test at four and eight weeks (mean difference (MD) 26.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.81 to 65.85; 2 studies; n = 131; and MD 26.58, 95% CI -8.88 to 62.04; 2 studies; n = 140); however, the certainty of evidence is low and very low, respectively, due to serious risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. After prehabilitation, the functional capacity before surgery improved, with a clinically relevant mean difference of 24.91 metres (95% CI 11.24 to 38.57; 3 studies; n = 225). The certainty of evidence was moderate due to downgrading for serious risk of bias. The effects of prehabilitation on the number of complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.29; 3 studies; n = 250), emergency department visits (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.32; 3 studies; n = 250) and re-admissions (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.65; 3 studies; n = 250) were small or even trivial. The certainty of evidence was low due to downgrading for serious risk of bias and imprecision. The effects on VO2peak, handgrip strength, length of hospital stay, mortality rate, health-related quality of life, return to normal activities, safety of the programme, and compliance rate could not be analysed quantitatively due to missing or insufficient data. The included studies did not report a difference between groups for health-related quality of life and length of hospital stay. Data on remaining outcomes were not reported or were reported inadequately in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation may result in an improved functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test both preoperatively and postoperatively. A solid effect on the number of omplications, postoperative emergency department visits and re-admissions could not be established. The certainty of evidence ranges from moderate to very low, due to downgrading for serious risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. In addition, only three heterogeneous studies were included in this review. Therefore, the findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. Numerous relevant RCTs are ongoing and will be included in a future update of this review.

Evaluating the longitudinal effect of colorectal surgery on health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) negatively affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Addressing shortcomings in literature, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of surgery for CRC on the course of HRQoL from baseline up to 2 years after diagnosis. METHODS: In this prospective, population-based study patients with newly diagnosed CRC were included between 2016 and 2019. HRQoL was assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire over time both between and within subgroups of patients that underwent right-sided colonic, left-sided colonic, and rectal resection using linear mixed model analyses. RESULTS: The study included 415 patients of whom 148 patients underwent right-sided colonic (36%), 147 left-sided colonic (35%), and 120 rectal resection (29%). Overall, HRQoL scores restored to baseline level 1 year after diagnosis. Impact of surgery seems to be more prominent in patients who underwent rectal resection, as they experienced more pain and had worse role and social functioning scores 4 weeks after surgery. Finally, among patients who underwent left-sided and rectal resection, physical functioning did not return to baseline level during follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study shows several differences (between-group and within-group) in HRQoL according to surgery type and offers perspective which patients may need additional support in the care pathway.

Prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation to improve functional capacity, reduce postoperative complications and improve quality of life in colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the cornerstone in curative treatment of colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, surgery itself can adversely affect patient health. 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' programmes, which include multimodal interventions, have improved patient outcomes substantially. However, these are mainly applied peri- and postoperatively. Multimodal prehabilitation includes multiple preoperative interventions to prepare patients for surgery with the aim of increasing resilience, thereby improving postoperative outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of multimodal prehabilitation programmes on functional capacity, postoperative complications, and quality of life in adult patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO in January 2021. We also searched trial registries up to March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for surgery, comparing multimodal prehabilitation programmes (defined as comprising at least two preoperative interventions) with no prehabilitation. We focused on the following outcomes: functional capacity (i.e. 6-minute walk test, VO2peak, handgrip strength), postoperative outcomes (i.e. complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, emergency department visits, re-admissions), health-related quality of life, compliance, safety of prehabilitation, and return to normal activities. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Any disagreements were solved with discussion and consensus. We pooled data to perform meta-analyses, where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs that enrolled 250 participants with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for elective (mainly laparoscopic) surgery. Included trials were conducted in tertiary care centres and recruited patients during periods ranging from 17 months to 45 months. A total of 130 participants enrolled in a preoperative four-week trimodal prehabilitation programme consisting of exercise, nutritional intervention, and anxiety reduction techniques. Outcomes of these participants were compared to those of 120 participants who started an identical but postoperative programme. Postoperatively, prehabilitation may improve functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test at four and eight weeks (mean difference (MD) 26.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.81 to 65.85; 2 studies; n = 131; and MD 26.58, 95% CI -8.88 to 62.04; 2 studies; n = 140); however, the certainty of evidence is low and very low, respectively, due to serious risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. After prehabilitation, the functional capacity before surgery improved, with a clinically relevant mean difference of 24.91 metres (95% CI 11.24 to 38.57; 3 studies; n = 225). The certainty of evidence was moderate due to downgrading for serious risk of bias. Prehabilitation may also result in fewer complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.29; 3 studies; n = 250) and fewer emergency department visits (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.32; 3 studies; n = 250). The certainty of evidence was low due to downgrading for serious risk of bias and imprecision. On the other hand, prehabilitation may also result in a higher re-admission rate (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.65; 3 studies; n = 250). The certainty of evidence was again low due to downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision. The effect on VO2peak, handgrip strength, length of hospital stay, mortality rate, health-related quality of life, return to normal activities, safety of the programme, and compliance rate could not be analysed quantitatively due to missing or insufficient data. The included studies did not report a difference between groups for health-related quality of life and length of hospital stay. Data on remaining outcomes were not reported or were reported inadequately in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation may result in an improved functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test both preoperatively and postoperatively. Complication rates and the number of emergency department visits postoperatively may also diminish due to a prehabilitation programme, while the number of re-admissions may be higher in the prehabilitation group. The certainty of evidence ranges from moderate to very low, due to downgrading for serious risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. In addition, only three heterogeneous studies were included in this review. Therefore, the findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. Numerous relevant RCTs are ongoing and will be included in a future update of this review.

Efficacy of Permacol injection for perianal fistulas in a tertiary referral population: poor outcome in patients with complex fistulas.

AIM: Injection of Permacol collagen paste can be used as a sphincter-sparing treatment for perianal fistulas. In a tertiary referral population we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Permacol injection and the clinical and fistula-related factors associated with recurrence. METHOD: This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with perianal fistulas treated with Permacol injection at a specialist centre between June 2015 and April 2019. Endoanal ultrasonography was systematically reanalysed, blinded to treatment outcome. Rectovaginal, anovaginal and Crohn's disease fistulas were excluded. Healed fistulas were defined as absent anal symptoms and a closed external opening on physical examination at a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with unhealed fistulas. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients (51 men; median age 45 years) were analysed. Seventy-two (80.0%) patients had complex perianal fistulas (greater than one-third sphincter involvement or multiple tracts). After a single Permacol injection, fistulas were healed in 20 (22.2%) patients at 3 months follow-up and in 18 (20.0%) patients at a median follow-up of 30 months (interquartile range 17-37). Eight (11.1%) patients with unhealed fistulas had significant improvement in their symptoms. Complex fistulas were significantly associated with unhealed status [OR 3.53 (95% CI 1.12-11.09); p = 0.031]. Twenty patients underwent subsequent Permacol injections, which were successful in six (30.0%) patients after one (n = 3) or two (n = 3) additional injections. CONCLUSION: This largest study to date in patients with mainly complex perianal fistulas, demonstrated that the efficacy of a single Permacol injection was only 20%. Complex fistulas were associated with a poor outcome.

Conflicting Guidelines: A Systematic Review on the Proper Interval for Colorectal Cancer Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Timely treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a quality indicator in oncological care. However, patients with CRC might benefit more from preoperative optimization rather than rapid treatment initiation. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the definition of the CRC treatment interval, (2) to study international recommendations regarding this interval and (3) to study whether length of the interval is associated with outcome. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the literature in June 2020 through MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, complemented with a web search and a survey among colorectal surgeons worldwide. Full-text papers including subjects with CRC and a description of the treatment interval were included. RESULTS: Definition of the treatment interval varies widely in published studies, especially due to different starting points of the interval. Date of diagnosis is often used as start of the interval, determined with date of pathological confirmation. The end of the interval is rather consistently determined with date of initiation of any primary treatment. Recommendations on the timeline of the treatment interval range between and within countries from two weeks between decision to treat and surgery, to treatment within seven weeks after pathological diagnosis. Finally, there is no decisive evidence that a longer treatment interval is associated with worse outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The interval from diagnosis to treatment for CRC treatment could be used for prehabilitation to benefit patient recovery. It may be that this strategy is more beneficial than urgently proceeding with treatment.

High prevalence of hidradenitis suppurativa in patients with perianal fistula.

BACKGROUND: Perianal fistula is an abnormal communication between the anal canal and perianal skin. Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic, auto-inflammatory skin disease in the intertriginous body areas, presenting with recurring abscesses, inflammatory nodules, and sinus tracts. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of HS in patients with a perianal fistula. METHODS: All patients with perianal fistula visiting a specialized proctology clinic between July and September 2017 were included and asked a validated diagnostic question for HS. Subsequently, physical examination was performed to objectively assess the diagnosis and relevant patient characteristics. RESULTS: In 6.6% (8/122) of patients, HS was diagnosed outside the perianal region. Four of these patients were newly diagnosed. The fistulas in HS patients were classified as a superficial fistula (three), a blind ending fistula (two), and a transsphincteric fistula (two). One patient had more than one type of fistula. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of HS in patients with a perianal fistula is at least 6.6%. This is higher than the prevalence reported in the general European population (1%) suggesting an association between perianal fistulas and HS. We stress the importance to screen for HS in patients with perianal fistulas in order to start appropriate anti-inflammatory treatment to reduce symptoms and disease progression.

EAES and SAGES 2018 consensus conference on acute diverticulitis management: evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Acute diverticulitis (AD) presents a unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for general surgeons. This collaborative project between EAES and SAGES aimed to summarize recent evidence and draw statements of recommendation to guide our members on comprehensive AD management. METHODS: Systematic reviews of the literature were conducted across six AD topics by an international steering group including experts from both societies. Topics encompassed the epidemiology, diagnosis, management of non-complicated and complicated AD as well as emergency and elective operative AD management. Consensus statements and recommendations were generated, and the quality of the evidence and recommendation strength rated with the GRADE system. Modified Delphi methodology was used to reach consensus among experts prior to surveying the EAES and SAGES membership on the recommendations and likelihood to impact their practice. Results were presented at both EAES and SAGES annual meetings with live re-voting carried out for recommendations with < 70% agreement. RESULTS: A total of 51 consensus statements and 41 recommendations across all six topics were agreed upon by the experts and submitted for members' online voting. Based on 1004 complete surveys and over 300 live votes at the SAGES and EAES Diverticulitis Consensus Conference (DCC), consensus was achieved for 97.6% (40/41) of recommendations with 92% (38/41) agreement on the likelihood that these recommendations would change practice if not already applied. Areas of persistent disagreement included the selective use of imaging to guide AD diagnosis, recommendations against antibiotics in non-complicated AD, and routine colonic evaluation after resolution of non-complicated diverticulitis. CONCLUSION: This joint EAES and SAGES consensus conference updates clinicians on the current evidence and provides a set of recommendations that can guide clinical AD management practice.

3D high-resolution anorectal manometry in patients with perianal fistulas: comparison with 3D-anal ultrasound.

BACKGROUND: Perianal fistula surgery can damage the anal sphincters which may cause faecal incontinence. By measuring regional pressures, 3D-HRAM potentially provides better guidance for surgical strategy in patients with perianal fistulas. The aim was to measure regional anal pressures with 3D-HRAM and to compare these with 3D-EUS findings in patients with perianal fistulas. METHODS: Consecutive patients with active perianal fistulas who underwent both 3D-EUS and 3D-HRAM at a clinic specialised in proctology were included. A group of 30 patients without fistulas served as controls. Data regarding demographics, complaints, previous perianal surgical procedures and obstetric history were collected. The mean and regional anal pressures were measured with 3D-HRAM. Fistula tract areas detected with 3D-EUS were analysed with 3D-HRAM by visual coding and the regional pressures of the corresponding and surrounding area of the fistula tract areas were measured. The study was granted by the VUmc Medical Ethical Committee. RESULTS: Forty patients (21 males, mean age 47) were included. Four patients had a primary fistula, 19 were previously treated with a seton/abscess drainage and 17 had a recurrence after previously performed fistula surgery. On 3D-HRAM, 24 (60%) fistula tract areas were good and 8 (20%) moderately visible. All but 7 (18%) patients had normal mean resting pressures. The mean resting pressure of the fistula tract area was significantly lower compared to the surrounding area (47 vs. 76 mmHg; p < 0.0001). Only 2 (5%) patients had a regional mean resting pressure < 10 mmHg of the fistula tract area. Using a Δ mean resting pressure ≥ 30 mmHg difference between fistula tract area and non-fistula tract area as alternative cut-off, 21 (53%) patients were identified. In 6 patients 3D-HRAM was repeated after surgery: a local pressure drop was detected in one patient after fistulotomy with increased complaints of faecal incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: Profound local anal pressure drops are found in the fistula tract areas in patients normal mean resting pressures. Fistulotomy may affect local sphincter pressure. This might influence surgical decision making in future.

Multimodal prehabilitation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a feasibility study.

Background: Anatomic pulmonary resection is the preferred curative treatment in operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but is associated with postoperative complications and inevitable compromise in functional capacity. Preoperative enhancement of functional capacity can be achieved with prehabilitation, yet the window of opportunity in NSCLC patients is small because patients are required to undergo surgery within 3 weeks from diagnosis. The goal of this study was to assess the feasibility of a prehabilitation programme in NSCLC within a 3-week timeframe and its effect on functional capacity-although the study was not powered to confirm improvements in functional capacity. Methods: Prehabilitation consisted of six interventions: exercise programme, nutritional support, mental support, smoking cessation, patient empowerment, and optimisation of respiratory status and was executed in two large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Assessments were scheduled at baseline (T0), end of program preoperatively (T1), and 6 weeks postoperatively (T2). Feasibility was defined as ≥80% of participants completing ≥80% of the programme. Functional capacity [6-minute walk test (6MWT), steep ramp test (SRT), one repetition maximum (1RM), maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), and hand grip strength (HGS)] was evaluated on T1 and T2 compared to T0 using mixed model analyses. Results: In total, 24 patients were included. In 95.8% of patients, the program proved feasible and preoperative functional capacity significantly improved in all pre-specified tests on T1. 1RM sustained improved at T2. Conclusions: Multimodal prehabilitation for lung surgery is feasible within a timeframe of 3 weeks. Even though this study was not powered to confirm it, prehabilitation may improve preoperative functional capacity.

Multimodal prehabilitation in elective oncological colorectal surgery enhances postoperative functional recovery: A secondary analysis of the PREHAB randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks as the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. The PREHAB trial revealed that prehabilitation in colorectal surgery leads to a reduction of severe complications and enhanced functional capacity. Nevertheless, risk selection for prehabilitation and the potential benefits for patients without postoperative complications remains unclear. This study aims to assess postoperative functional capacity, also in patients without postoperative complications. MATERIALS & METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the PREHAB trial. Functional capacity tests, including cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), steep ramp test (SRT), 6-min walking test (6MWT), stair climb test (SCT), 30" sit-to-stand test (STS), timed-up-and-go test (TUG), and muscle strength assessments, were conducted at baseline (T0) and 4 weeks postoperatively (T3). The primary outcome was the relative change in functional capacity from baseline to postoperative (ΔT0-T3) per group (i.e., prehabilitation vs control). Secondary, identical analysis were performed for patients without postoperative complications in each group. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analysis included 251 patients. For postoperative functional capacity, prehabilitation patients showed improvements in VO2peak (p = 0.024), VO2AT (p = 0.017), SRT (p = 0.001), 6MWT (p = 0.049), SCT (p = 0.012), and STS (p = 0.001) compared to the control group. Regarding muscle strength, prehabilitation patients showed improvements in estimated 1RM lateral pull down (p = 0.016), 1RM chest press (p = 0.001), 1RM leg press (p = 0.001) and HGS (p = 0.005) compared to controls. Additionally, prehabilitation patients more often reached baseline levels at T3 in VO2AT (p = 0.037), SRT (p = 0.008), 6MWT (p = 0.013), STS (p = 0.012), estimated 1RM lateral pull down (p = 0.002), 1RM chest press (p = 0.001) and 1RM leg press (p = 0.001) compared to controls. Moreover, even patients without postoperative complications in the prehabilitation group showed better postoperative functional capacity and more often reached baseline levels at T3, compared to controls. CONCLUSION: Multimodal prehabilitation in CRC surgery is associated with improved postoperative functional capacity, even in patients without postoperative complications.

Prehabilitation for patients with colorectal cancer: a snapshot of current daily practice in Dutch hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal prehabilitation programmes are increasingly being imbedded in colorectal cancer (CRC) pathways to enhance the patient's recovery after surgery. However, there is no (inter)national consensus on the content or design of such a programme. This study aimed to evaluate the current practice and opinion regarding preoperative screening and prehabilitation for patients undergoing surgery for CRC throughout the Netherlands. METHODS: All regular Dutch hospitals offering colorectal cancer surgery were included. An online survey was sent to one representative colorectal surgeon per hospital. Descriptive statistics were used for analyses. RESULTS: Response rate was 100% (n = 69). Routine preoperative screening of patients with CRC for frailty, diminished nutritional status and anaemia was the standard of care in nearly all Dutch hospitals (97%, 93% and 94%, respectively). Some form of prehabilitation was provided in 46 hospitals (67%) of which more than 80% addressed nutritional status, frailty, physical status and anaemia. All but two of the remaining hospitals were willing to adopt prehabilitation. The majority of the hospitals offered prehabilitation to specific subgroups of patients with CRC, such as the elderly (41%), the frail (71%) or high-risk patients (57%). There was high variability in the setting, design and content of the prehabilitation programmes. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas preoperative screening is sufficiently incorporated in Dutch hospitals, standardised enhancement of the patient's condition in the context of multimodal prehabilitation seems to be challenging. This study presents an overview of current clinical practice in the Netherlands. Uniform clinical prehabilitation guidelines are vital to diminish heterogeneity in programmes and to produce useful data to enable a nationwide implementation of an evidence-based prehabilitation programme.

Multimodal prehabilitation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer undergoing anatomical resection: protocol of a non-randomised feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The preoperative period can be used to enhance a patient's functional capacity with multimodal prehabilitation and consequently improve and fasten postoperative recovery. Especially, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgical patients may benefit from this intervention, since the affected and resected organ is an essential part of the cardiorespiratory fitness. Drafting a prehabilitation programme is challenging, since many disciplines are involved, and time between diagnosis of NSCLC and surgery is limited. We designed a multimodal prehabilitation programme prior to NSCLC surgery and aimed to conduct a study to assess feasibility and indicative evidence of efficacy of this programme. Publication of this protocol may help other healthcare facilities to implement such a programme. METHODS: The multimodal prehabilitation programme consists of an exercise programme, nutritional support, psychological support, smoking cessation, patient empowerment and respiratory optimisation. In two Dutch teaching hospitals, 40 adult patients with proven or suspected NSCLC will be included. In a non-randomised fashion, 20 patients follow the multimodal prehabilitation programme, and 20 will be assessed in the control group, according to patient preference. Assessments will take place at four time points: baseline, the week before surgery, 6 weeks postoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Feasibility and indicative evidence of efficacy of the prehabilitation programme will be assessed as primary outcomes. DISCUSSION: Since the time between diagnosis of NSCLC and surgery is limited, it is a challenge to implement a prehabilitation programme. This study will assess whether this is feasible, and evidence of efficacy can be found. The non-randomised fashion of the study might result in a selection and confounding bias. However, the control group may help putting the results of the prehabilitation group in perspective. By publishing this protocol, we aim to facilitate others to evaluate and implement a multimodal prehabilitation programme for surgical NSCLC patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The current study is registered as NL8080 in the Netherlands Trial Register on the 10th of October 2019, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8080 . Secondary identifiers: CCMO (Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects) number NL70578.015.19, reference number of the Medical Ethical Review Committee of Máxima MC W19.045.

Effect of Multimodal Prehabilitation on Reducing Postoperative Complications and Enhancing Functional Capacity Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: The PREHAB Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Colorectal surgery is associated with substantial morbidity rates and a lowered functional capacity. Optimization of the patient's condition in the weeks prior to surgery may attenuate these unfavorable sequelae. Objective: To determine whether multimodal prehabilitation before colorectal cancer surgery can reduce postoperative complications and enhance functional recovery. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PREHAB randomized clinical trial was an international, multicenter trial conducted in teaching hospitals with implemented enhanced recovery after surgery programs. Adult patients with nonmetastasized colorectal cancer were assessed for eligibility and randomized to either prehabilitation or standard care. Both arms received standard perioperative care. Patients were enrolled from June 2017 to December 2020, and follow-up was completed in December 2021. However, this trial was prematurely stopped due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Interventions: The 4-week in-hospital supervised multimodal prehabilitation program consisted of a high-intensity exercise program 3 times per week, a nutritional intervention, psychological support, and a smoking cessation program when needed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) score, number of patients with CCI score more than 20, and improved walking capacity expressed as the 6-minute walking distance 4 weeks postoperatively. Results: In the intention-to-treat population of 251 participants (median [IQR] age, 69 [60-76] years; 138 [55%] male), 206 (82%) had tumors located in the colon and 234 (93%) underwent laparoscopic- or robotic-assisted surgery. The number of severe complications (CCI score >20) was significantly lower favoring prehabilitation compared with standard care (21 of 123 [17.1%] vs 38 of 128 [29.7%]; odds ratio, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.26-0.87]; P = .02). Participants in prehabilitation encountered fewer medical complications (eg, respiratory) compared with participants receiving standard care (19 of 123 [15.4%] vs 35 of 128 [27.3%]; odds ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.26-0.89]; P = .02). Four weeks after surgery, 6-minute walking distance did not differ significantly between groups when compared with baseline (mean difference prehabilitation vs standard care 15.6 m [95% CI, -1.4 to 32.6]; P = .07). Secondary parameters of functional capacity in the postoperative period generally favored prehabilitation compared with standard care. Conclusions and Relevance: This PREHAB trial demonstrates the benefit of a multimodal prehabilitation program before colorectal cancer surgery as reflected by fewer severe and medical complications postoperatively and an optimized postoperative recovery compared with standard care. Trial Registration: trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR5947.

Estimating VO2peak in 18-90 Year-Old Adults: Development and Validation of the FitMáx©-Questionnaire.

Purpose: Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) plays an essential role in health outcomes and quality of life. However, it is often not assessed nor estimated. Objective CRF assessment is costly, labour intensive and not widely available. Patient-reported outcome measures estimate CRF more cost-efficiently, but current questionnaires lack accuracy. The aim of this study is to develop a new self-reported questionnaire to estimate CRF. Materials and Methods: The FitMáx©-questionnaire, consisting of only three questions assessing walking, stair climbing, and cycling capacity, was compared with the commonly used Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) and Veterans Specific Activity Questionnaire (VSAQ). These questionnaires were compared to peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) as measured with cardiopulmonary exercise testing. This study included 759 cardiac, pulmonary and oncologic patients and healthy persons aged 18‒90. Results: FitMáx© strongly correlated (r = 0.94 (0.92‒0.95) SEE = 4.14 mL∙kg-1∙min-1) with measured VO2peak. Bias between predicted and measured VO2peak was -0.24 (-9.23‒8.75; 95% limits of agreement) mL·kg-1·min-1. The FitMáx© scored superiorly on correlation and SEE compared with the DASI and VSAQ, r = 0.75 (0.68‒0.80) SEE = 4.62 mL∙kg-1∙min-1 and r = 0.87 (0.83‒0.90) SEE = 6.75 mL∙kg-1∙min-1, respectively. Conclusion: FitMáx© is a valid and accessible questionnaire to estimate CRF expressed as VO2peak in clinical practice and shows substantial improvement compared to currently used questionnaires.

Knotless seton for perianal fistulas: feasibility and effect on perianal disease activity.

Patients with perianal fistulas are frequently treated by a knotted seton which is well-known for causing complaints. We aimed to assess the feasibility of the knotless SuperSeton and advantages with respect to perianal disease activity. In a prospective cohort study, we included all consecutive adult patients with a knotted seton in situ or a perianal fistula requiring new seton drainage. Primary endpoint was seton feasibility (maintenance of the connection for minimally three months). Secondary endpoints included improvement of the Perianal Disease Activity Index (PDAI), complications and re-interventions within three months of follow-up. PDAI scores of patients with a knotted seton were crossover compared to PDAI scores after knotless seton replacement. Sixty patients (42% male, mean age 42 (SD 13.15), 41 with Crohn's disease) were included between August 2016 and April 2018. Of 79 knotless setons, 69 (87.3%) stayed connected for ≥ 3 months. Overall, the knotless seton significantly decreased discharge (P = 0.001), pain (P < 0.001) and induration (P < 0.001) measured by the PDAI when compared to baseline. In patients with a knotted seton, replacement by the knotless seton significantly decreased discharge (P = 0.005) and pain (P < 0.001) measured by the PDAI. Furthermore, 71% of patients reported fewer cleaning problems compared to the knotted seton. Ten patients developed a perianal abscess, and five patients required a re-intervention. This study supports the feasibility of the knotless seton with promising short-term results. The knotless seton might be preferred over the knotted seton in terms of perianal disease activity.

Prehabilitation, making patients fit for surgery - a new frontier in perioperative care.

Optimizing a patients' condition before surgery to improve the postoperative outcome can be achieved by using prehabilitation; preoperative interventions focusing on modifiable risk factors to improve the physical, nutritional, and mental status of the patient. A multimodal, multidisciplinary approach induces a synergistic effect between the various interventions and affects the outcome postoperatively. While awaiting higher-quality evidence, the worldwide implementation of prehabilitation programs has started, resulting in a true revolution in perioperative care.