Content area
Background
This study aimed to compare the effect on postoperative complications of combined prehabilitation targeting predefined co-existing risky SNAP factors with usual preoperative routines in surgical patients.
Methods
This systematic review followed the PRISMA 2020 guideline and the protocol (CRD42022282611). Five databases were searched from inception to November 7, 2022 for randomised controlled trials on prehabilitation targeting ≥2 predefined risky lifestyles compared with usual preoperative routines. Risky lifestyles included Smoking, Nutrition (malnutrition and/or BMI>25), risky Alcohol intake, and Physical inactivity (SNAP). Primary outcome was postoperative complications ≤30 days. Cochrane’s risk-of-bias tool 2 was used and meta-analyses were conducted. GRADE was used to assess certainty of evidence.
Results
The search resulted in 20,862 records. At full-text screening, only two (120 participants) of 24 identified trials on combined SNAP intervention had ≥2 predefined risk factors and were included. One (n=110) on intensive physical and brief nutritional intervention to frail patients with colorectal cancer resection reported complication rates of 45% in both groups (relative risk (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.51). The other study (n=10, subgroup) on intensive alcohol and smoking intervention in patients with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy, reported complications in 3/7 vs 3/3 participants. The meta-analysis estimated a RR of 0.79 (95% CI 0.41 to 1.51, I 2 51%).
Conclusion
Two small of the 24 trials on prehabilitation targeted co-existing and predefined risky SNAP factors and the effect on postoperative complications is very uncertain. Future prehabilitation research involving patient needs is warranted.
Details
Exercise;
Collaboration;
Intervention;
Malnutrition;
Bias;
Handbooks;
Patients;
Quality of life;
Gastrointestinal surgery;
Drinking behavior;
Frailty;
Length of stay;
Smoking;
Weight control;
Postoperative;
Complications;
Alcohol use;
Obesity;
Risk factors;
Overweight;
Colorectal carcinoma;
Meta-analysis;
Systematic review;
Lifestyles
; Jensen, Sofie Anne-Marie, S 1 ; Lauridsen, Susanne V 2 ; Rasmussen, Mette 3
; Christensen, Robin 4 ; Joensen, Ulla N 5 ; Rosenberg, Jacob 6
; Tønnesen Hanne 3
1 The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Frederiksberg, Denmark
2 The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Frederiksberg, Denmark, Centre for Perioperative Optimization, Department of Surgery, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
3 The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Frederiksberg, Denmark, Department of Health Sciences, Lunds Universitet, Lund, Skåne County, Sweden
4 The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Frederiksberg, Denmark, Cochrane Denmark & Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
5 Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark, Department of Urology, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
6 Centre for Perioperative Optimization, Department of Surgery, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark