Adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen therapy for spinal cord ischemia after complex aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) with paraplegia or paraparesis is a devastating complication of complex aortic repair (CAR). Treatment includes cerebrospinal fluid drainage, maintenance of hemoglobin concentration (>10 g/L), and elevating mean arterial blood pressure. Animal and human case series have reported improvements in SCI outcomes with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). We reviewed our center's experience with HBOT as a rescue treatment for spinal cord ischemia post-CAR in addition to standard treatment. METHODS: A retrospective review of the University Health Network's Hyperbaric Medicine Unit treatment database identified HBOT sessions for patients with SCI post-CAR between January 2013 and June 2021. Mean estimates of overall motor function scores were determined for postoperative, pre-HBOT, post-HBOT (within 4 hours of the final HBOT session), and at the final assessment (last available in-hospital evaluation) using a linear mixed model. A subgroup analysis compared the mean estimates of overall motor function scores between improvement and non-improvement groups at given timepoints. Improvement of motor function was defined as either a ≥2 point increase in overall muscle function score in patients with paraparesis or an upward change in motor deficit categorization (para/monoplegia, paraparesis, and no deficit). Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying by improvement or non-improvement of motor function from pre-HBOT to final evaluation. RESULTS: Thirty patients were treated for SCI. Pre-HBOT, the motor deficit categorization was 10 paraplegia, three monoplegia, 16 paraparesis, and one unable to assess. At the final assessment, 14 patients demonstrated variable degrees of motor function improvement; eight patients demonstrated full motor function recovery. Seven of the 10 patients with paraplegia remained paraplegic despite HBOT. The estimated mean of overall muscle function score for pre-HBOT was 16.6 ± 2.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.9-22.3) and for final assessment was 23.4 ± 2.9 (95% CI, 17.7-29.1). The estimated mean difference between pre-HBOT and final assessment overall muscle function score was 6.7 ± 3.1 (95% CI, 0.6-16.1). The estimated mean difference of the overall muscle function score between pre-HBOT and final assessment for the improved group was 16.6 ± 3.5 (95% CI, 7.5-25.7) vs -4.9 ± 4.2 (95% CI, -16.0 to 6.2) for the non-improved group. CONCLUSIONS: HBOT, in addition to standard treatment, may potentially improve recovery in spinal cord function following SCI post-CAR. However, the potential benefits of HBOT are not equally distributed among subgroups.

Pulmonary function following hyperbaric oxygen therapy: A longitudinal observational study.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is known to be associated with pulmonary oxygen toxicity. However, the effect of modern HBOT protocols on pulmonary function is not completely understood. The present study evaluates pulmonary function test changes in patients undergoing serial HBOT. We prospectively collected data on patients undergoing HBOT from 2016-2021 at a tertiary referral center (protocol registration NCT05088772). Patients underwent pulmonary function testing with a bedside spirometer/pneumotachometer prior to HBOT and after every 20 treatments. HBOT was performed using 100% oxygen at a pressure of 2.0-2.4 atmospheres absolute (203-243 kPa) for 90 minutes, five times per week. Patients' charts were retrospectively reviewed for demographics, comorbidities, medications, HBOT specifications, treatment complications, and spirometry performance. Primary outcomes were defined as change in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced mid-expiratory flow (FEF25-75), after 20, 40, and 60 HBOT sessions. Data was analyzed with descriptive statistics and mixed-model linear regression. A total of 86 patients were enrolled with baseline testing, and the analysis included data for 81 patients after 20 treatments, 52 after 40 treatments, and 12 after 60 treatments. There were no significant differences in pulmonary function tests after 20, 40, or 60 HBOT sessions. Similarly, a subgroup analysis stratifying the cohort based on pre-existing respiratory disease, smoking history, and the applied treatment pressure did not identify any significant changes in pulmonary function tests during HBOT. There were no significant longitudinal changes in FEV1, FVC, or FEF25-75 after serial HBOT sessions in patients regardless of pre-existing respiratory disease. Our results suggest that the theoretical risk of pulmonary oxygen toxicity following HBOT is unsubstantiated with modern treatment protocols, and that pulmonary function is preserved even in patients with pre-existing asthma, chronic obstructive lung disease, and interstitial lung disease.

High-intensity interval training or resistance training versus usual care in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance: a 3-arm feasibility randomized controlled trial.

This study assessed the feasibility of a phase II randomized controlled trial of high-intensity interval training (HIIT), resistance training (RT), and usual care (UC) in men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance and evaluated changes in clinically relevant outcomes. Eighteen men undergoing active surveillance for PCa were randomized to HIIT (n = 5), RT (n = 7), or UC (n = 6). Exercise participants attended 2 supervised sessions weekly and were instructed to complete 1 home-based session weekly for 8 weeks. UC participants were provided with physical activity guidelines. Feasibility was met for attendance, compliance, and retention, but not recruitment. HIIT increased leg press (mean: +8.2 kg, 95% CI 1.1 to 15.3) from baseline to 8 weeks. RT increased seated row (mean: +11.7 kg, 95% CI 6.1 to 17.3), chest press (mean: +10.4 kg, 95% CI 5.3 to 15.5), leg press (mean: +13.1 kg, 95% CI 5.9 to 20.3), serum insulin-like binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) (mean: +400.0 ng/mL, 95% CI 94.5 to 705.5), and decreased interferon-γ (mean: -3.1 pg/mL, 95% CI -5.7 to -0.4). No changes were observed in the UC group. HIIT and RT may be effective strategies for improving muscle strength; however, only RT may increase serum IGFBP-3. Strategies that can enhance recruitment in men on active surveillance are important prior to conducting a phase II trial. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04266262. Novelty: High-intensity interval training or resistance training are feasible during active surveillance for prostate cancer. Resistance training may suppress the tumour-promoting effects of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) via increased expression of IGFBP-3.

A Pragmatic Non-Randomized Trial of Prehabilitation Prior to Cancer Surgery: Study Protocol and COVID-19-Related Adaptations.

BACKGROUND: Experimental data highlight the potential benefits and health system cost savings related to surgical prehabilitation; however, adequately powered randomized controlled trial (RCT) data remain nascent. Emerging prehabilitation services may be informed by early RCT data but can be limited in informing real-world program development. Pragmatic trials emphasize external validity and generalizability to understand and advise intervention development and implementation in clinical settings. This paper presents the methodology of a pragmatic prehabilitation trial to complement emerging phase III clinical trials and inform implementation strategies. METHODS: This is a pilot pragmatic clinical trial conducted in a large academic hospital in Toronto, Ontario, Canada to assess feasibility of clinical implementation and derive estimates of effectiveness. Feasibility data include program referral rates, enrolment and attrition, intervention adherence and safety, participant satisfaction, and barriers and facilitators to programming. The study aims to receive 150 eligible referrals for adult, English-speaking, preoperative oncology patients with an identified indication for prehabilitation (e.g., frailty, deconditioning, malnutrition, psychological distress). Study participants undergo a baseline assessment and shared-decision making regarding the intervention setting: either facility-based prehabilitation or home-based prehabilitation. In both scenarios, participants receive an individualized exercise prescription, stress-reduction psychological support, nutrition counseling, and protein supplementation, and if appropriate, smoking cessation program referrals. Secondary objectives include estimating intervention effects at the week prior to surgery and 30 and 90 days postoperatively. Outcomes include surgical complications, postoperative length of stay, mortality, hospital readmissions, physical fitness, psychological well-being, and quality of life. Data from participants who decline the intervention but consent for research-related access to health records will serve as comparators. The COVID-19 pandemic required the introduction of a 'virtual program' using only telephone or internet-based communication for screening, assessments, or intervention was introduced. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic trial will provide evidence on the feasibility and viability of prehabilitation services delivered under usual clinical conditions. Study amendments due to the COVID-19 pandemic are presented as strategies to maintain prehabilitation research and services to potentially mitigate the consequences of extended surgery wait times.

Exercise before, during, and after Hospitalization for Allogeneic Hematological Stem Cell Transplant: A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

People with cancer who undergo allogeneic hematological stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT) experience significant deconditioning that can compromise quality of life. Exercise has shown to be beneficial before or after allo-HSCT; however, little is known about exercise therapy delivered across the continuum of care. We conducted a feasibility randomized controlled trial of exercise delivered prior to admission, during the inpatient stay, and after discharge versus control in people with planned allo-HSCT. Feasibility was assessed via recruitment and retention rates, the incidence of adverse events, and adherence to the exercise prescription. Estimates of efficacy were measured at baseline, one week prior to hospital admission, and 100 days and one year after transplant. The recruitment and retention rates were 20% and 33%, respectively. One serious adverse event occurred during the baseline six-minute walk test that precluded participation in the study and no adverse events were associated with the intervention. From baseline to pre-transplant, the intervention group improved six-minute walk test distances by 45 m (95% CI: -18.0 to 108.7)-a finding that warrants further investigation with an adequately powered trial. Our study contributes important feasibility considerations and pilot data for future exercise intervention research in allo-HSCT recipients.

Aerobic capacity attainment and reasons for cardiopulmonary exercise test termination in people with cancer: a descriptive, retrospective analysis from a single laboratory.

PURPOSE: Aerobic exercise prescriptions in clinical populations commonly involve target intensities based on cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET). CPETs are often discontinued prior to a patient achieving true maximum oxygen consumption (VO2 max) which can adversely affect exercise dose and efficacy monitoring; however, reasons for early discontinuation are poorly reported. Accordingly, we explored the CPET termination reasons in persons with cancer participating in exercise intervention studies. METHODS: This study comprised of an exploratory, descriptive analysis of retrospective CPET data (VO2 and anaerobic threshold) and termination reasons in a convenience sample of people with cancer participating in exercise intervention studies in a single laboratory. CPETs were standardized using the modified Bruce treadmill protocol with expired gas collection and analysis using a metabolic cart. VO2 max was considered "met" when participants demonstrated (a) oxygen consumption plateau or (b) two of the following criteria: rating of perceived exertion ≥ 9/10, respiratory exchange ratio ≥ 1.15, and/or heart rate of 95% of age-predicted maximum. The frequency and distribution of reasons for test termination relative to the number of CPET exposures for the participants were reported. RESULTS: Forty-four participants engaged in exercise studies between February 2016 and March 2018 provided data for the analysis. Participants completed up to three CPETs during this period (total of 78 CPETs in the current analysis). Eighty-six percent of all CPETs were terminated prior to achieving VO2 max verification criteria and no tests resulted in an oxygen consumption plateau. For those that did not demonstrate achievement of VO2 max verification criteria, reasons for discontinuation were distributed as follows: equipment discomfort-49%, volitional peak-36%, and physical discomfort-14.9%. For those who met VO2 max criteria, volitional peak was the most common reason for test termination (45.5%), followed by physical discomfort (36.4%), and equipment discomfort (18.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In our sample of cancer survivors, VO2 max criteria were infrequently met with equipment discomfort being a primary reason for participant-driven test termination. Protocol and equipment considerations are necessary for interpretation and application of CPET findings in clinical practice.

Pfilates and Hypopressives for the Treatment of Urinary Incontinence After Radical Prostatectomy: Results of a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence (UI) is an important side effect of radical prostatectomy (RP). Coactivation of surrounding muscles via novel techniques for pelvic floor rehabilitation known as Pfilates and Hypopressives has not been compared to pelvic floor muscle exercises (PFMXs) for UI. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and efficacy of isolated PFMXs with and without the addition of Pfilates and Hypopressives on UI recovery following RP. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a community and tertiary cancer center in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 226 patients undergoing RP were assessed for eligibility. One hundred twenty-two patients were eligible and 50 consented to participate; 37 participants completed the trial. METHODS: Participants were randomized to either isolated PFMX (control) or PFMX plus Pfilates and Hypopressives (advanced pelvic floor exercises; APFX) groups. PFMX participants (n = 25) received instructions for isolated pelvic floor contractions starting with 30 contractions per day during weeks 1 to 2 up to 180 per day for weeks 7 to 26. The APFX group (n = 25) received a comparable volume of exercises. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Feasibility was assessed by rates of recruitment, adverse events, and study-arm compliance. Information about UI and quality of life was collected 1 week before surgery and at 2, 6, 12, and 26 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: The recruitment rate was 41%, adherence to the PFMXs and APFXs was >70%, and there were no reported adverse events. Between-group differences were observed in the frequency of self-reported 24-hour urinary leakage (rate ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.98) and during waking hours (rate ratio 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.91) at 26 weeks after surgery favoring APFX. CONCLUSIONS: Pfilates and Hypopressives are feasible in men undergoing RP, and preliminary data suggest a potential benefit in aiding recovery of urinary control. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Development, implementation, and effects of a cancer center's exercise-oncology program.

BACKGROUND: National and international bodies acknowledge the benefit of exercise for people with cancer, yet limited accessibility to related programing remains. Given their involvement in managing the disease, cancer centers can play a central role in delivering exercise-oncology services. The authors developed and implemented a clinically integrated exercise-oncology program at a major cancer center and evaluated its effectiveness and participant experience. METHODS: A hospital-based program with prescribed at-home exercise was developed and accepted referrals over a 42-month period (3.5 years). Implementation was conducted in 2 phases: a pilot phase for women with breast cancer and men with genitourinary cancer and a roll-out phase for all patients with cancer. Enrolled patients were assessed and received an exercise prescription as well as a program manual, resistance bands, and a stability ball from a kinesiologist. Program participation and effectiveness were evaluated up to 48 weeks after the baseline assessment using intention-to-treat analyses. Participants in the roll-out phase were asked to complete a program experience questionnaire at the completion of the 48-week follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 112 participants enrolled in the pilot, and 150 enrolled in the roll-out phase. Program attrition to 48 weeks was 48% and 65% in the pilot and roll-out phases, respectively. In participants who consented to research evaluation of their performance, objective and patient-reported measures of functional capacity improved significantly from baseline in both phases. Participants were highly satisfied with the program. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant drop-out to program endpoints, our cancer-exercise program demonstrated clinically relevant improvement in functional outcomes and was highly appreciated by participants.

Prehabilitation and acute postoperative physical activity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a secondary analysis from an RCT.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity via early mobilization after surgery is recommended to help reduce the risk of postoperative adverse effects and to improve recovery. We explored whether prehabilitation is associated with differences in physical activity during the postoperative inpatient stay and the week after discharge in men undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS: This study was a pre-planned secondary analysis of a larger randomized controlled trial of home-based exercise prehabilitation versus control for men undergoing radical prostatectomy. Twenty-one participants in both the prehabilitation and control groups wore accelerometers from postoperative day 1 until 7 days after discharge. Mean physical activity (minutes) during postoperative day 1 (inpatient) and 1 week following hospital discharge (outpatient) were estimated using ANCOVA. Pearson's correlation coefficients were conducted for mean in- an outpatient physical activity with length of stay and changes in 6-min walk test (6MWT) over the course of the prehabilitation period. RESULTS: Nineteen participants in each group provided usable accelerometry data for analysis. Inpatient physical activity of light or greater activity during postoperative day 1 for prehabilitation and control groups were 442.5 ± 40.2 and 324.0 ± 40.2 min, respectively (∆ = 117.5 ± 57.8 min, 95%CI [0.04, 235.0]). During the outpatient period, mean daily physical activity was 448.4 ± 31.2 and 491.42 ± 31.2 min for prehabilitation and control participants, respectively (∆ = 42.6 ± 44.9 min; 95% CI [- 134.0, 48.7]). There were no correlations between in- or outpatient physical activity and preoperative changes in 6MWT or length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Accelerometry-based measurement of physical activity in the acute postoperative period is feasible in older men undergoing abdominal surgery. Prehabilitation may be associated with increased inpatient physical activity; however, larger and longer studies are needed to elucidate any associated effects on clinical and patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02036684 registered January 15, 2014.

Prehabilitation for radical prostatectomy: A multicentre randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative exercise and fitness are predictors of surgical recovery; however, little is known of the effect of preoperative exercise-based conditioning, known as prehabilitation, in this for men undergoing radical prostatectomy. Our study examined the feasibility and effects of prehabilitation on perioperative and postoperative outcomes in men undergoing radical prostatectomy. METHODS: This feasibility RCT compared prehabilitation (PREHAB) versus a control condition (CON) in 86 men undergoing radical prostatectomy. PREHAB consisted of home-based, moderate-intensity exercise prior to surgery. Both groups received a preoperative pelvic floor training regimen. Feasibility was assessed via rates of recruitment, attrition, intervention duration and adherence, and adverse events. Clinical outcomes included surgical complications, and length of stay. The following outcomes were assessed at baseline, prior to surgery, and 4, 12, and 26-weeks postoperatively: 6-min walk test (6MWT), upper-extremity strength, quality of life, psychosocial wellbeing, urologic symptoms, and physical activity volume. RESULTS: The recruitment rate was 47% and attrition rates were 25% and 33% for PREHAB and CON, respectively. Adherence to PREHAB was 69% with no serious intervention-related adverse events. After the intervention and prior to surgery, PREHAB participants demonstrated less anxiety (P = 0.035) and decreased body fat percentage (P = 0.001) compared to CON. Four-weeks postoperatively, PREHAB participants had greater 6MWT scores of clinical significance compared to CON (P = 0.006). Finally, compared to CON, grip strength and anxiety were also greater in the PREHAB at 26-weeks (P = 0.022) and (P = 0.025), respectively. CONCLUSION: While feasible and safe, prehabilitation has promising benefits to physical and psychological wellbeing at salient timepoints relative to radical prostatectomy.

A pilot randomized trial of conventional versus advanced pelvic floor exercises to treat urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy is the most common and effective treatment for localized prostate cancer. Unfortunately, radical prostatectomy is associated with urinary incontinence and has a significant negative impact on quality of life. Pelvic floor exercises are the most common non-invasive management strategy for urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy; however, studies provide inconsistent findings regarding their efficacy. One potential reason for sub-optimal efficacy of these interventions is the under-utilization of regional muscles that normally co-activate with the pelvic floor, such as the transverse abdominis, rectus abdominis, and the diaphragm. Two novel approaches to improve urinary continence recovery are 'Pfilates' and 'Hypopressives' that combine traditional pelvic floor exercises with the activation of additional supportive muscles. Our study will compare an advanced pelvic floor exercise training program that includes Pfilates and Hypopressives, to a conventional pelvic floor exercises regimen for the treatment of post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a pilot, randomized controlled trial of advanced pelvic floor muscle training versus conventional pelvic floor exercises for men with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eighty-eight men who will be undergoing radical prostatectomy at hospitals in Toronto, Canada will be recruited. Eligible participants must not have undergone androgen deprivation therapy and/or radiation therapy. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive 26 weeks of the advanced or conventional pelvic floor exercise programs. Each program will be progressive and have comparable exercise volume. The primary outcomes are related to feasibility for a large, adequately powered randomized controlled trial to determine efficacy for the treatment of urinary incontinence. Feasibility will be assessed via recruitment success, participant retention, outcome capture, intervention adherence, and prevalence of adverse events. Secondary outcomes of intervention efficacy include measures of pelvic floor strength, urinary incontinence, erectile function, and quality of life. Secondary outcome measures will be collected prior to surgery (baseline), and at 2, 6, 12, 26-weeks post-operatively. DISCUSSION: Pfilates and Hypopressives are novel approaches to optimizing urinary function after radical prostatectomy. This trial will provide the foundation of data for future, large-scale trials to definitively describe the effect of these advanced pelvic floor exercise modalities compared to conventional pelvic floor exercise regimes for men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicalstrials.gov Identifier: NCT02233608.

Prehabilitation for men undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multi-centre, pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: An emerging field of research describes the role of preoperative health behaviours, known as prehabilitation. The preoperative period may be a more physically and emotionally salient time to introduce and foster chronic adherence to health behaviours, such as exercise, in patients compared to post-treatment during recovery. Moreover, physical and psychosocial improvements during the preoperative period may translate into an enhanced recovery trajectory with reduced operative complications and postoperative adverse effects. No studies have assessed prehabilitation for men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, pilot randomized control trial conducted at two Canadian urban teaching hospitals. 100 men undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer with no contraindications to exercise will be recruited and randomized to the prehabiliation program or usual care. Prehabilitation participants will engage in a preoperative, individualized exercise program including pelvic floor muscle strengthening instructions and a healthy lifestyle guide for men with prostate cancer. These participants will be asked to engage in 60 minutes of home-based, unsupervised, moderate-intensity exercise on 3-4 days per week. Usual care participants will receive the same pelvic floor muscle strengthening instructions and healthy lifestyle guide only. We will assess the feasibility of conducting an adequately powered trial of the same design via recruitment rate, programmatic adherence/contamination, attrition, and safety. Estimates of intervention efficacy will be captured through measurements at baseline (4-8 weeks preoperatively), within 1 week prior to surgery, and postoperatively at 4, 12, and 26 weeks. Efficacy outcomes include: fatigue, quality of life, urinary incontinence, physical fitness, body composition, aerobic fitness, pain, and physical activity volume. DISCUSSION: The primary outcome of this study is to determine the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, randomized controlled trial of prehabilitation versus usual care and to estimate effect sizes that will inform sample size determinations for subsequent trials in this field. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine a structured presurgical exercise program for men undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. This trial will advance our understanding of strategies to efficiently and effectively use the preoperative period to optimize postoperative recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02036684.