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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Making Patients Fit for Surgery: Introducing a Four Pillar Multimodal Prehabilitation Program in Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Considering the relation between preoperative functional capacity and postoperative complications, enhancing patients' functional capacity before surgery with a prehabilitation program may facilitate faster recovery and improve quality of life. However, time before surgery is short, mandating a multimodal and high-intensity training approach. This study investigated feasibility and safety of a prehabilitation program for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Multimodal prehabilitation was offered to patients eligible for participation and they were assigned to an intervention or control group by program availability. The prehabilitation program consisted of the following four interventions: in-hospital high-intensity endurance and strength training, high-protein nutrition and supplements, smoking cessation, and psychological support. Program attendance, patient satisfaction, adverse events, and functional capacity were determined. RESULTS: Fifty patients participated in this study (prehabilitation 20, control 30). Program evaluation revealed a high (90%) attendance rate and high level of patient satisfaction. No adverse events occurred. Endurance and/or strength were improved. Eighty-six percent of patients with prehabilitation recovered to their baseline functional capacity 4 weeks postoperatively, 40% in the control group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal prehabilitation including high-intensity training for colorectal cancer patients is feasible, safe, and effective. A randomized controlled trial (NTR5947) was initiated to determine whether prehabilitation may lower morbidity and mortality rates in colorectal surgery.

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.