Prehabilitation in gynecological oncology - are we ready to implement the program in polish oncological centers?

OBJECTIVES: Prehabilitation is a concept of holistic approach to the patient and includes preoperative efforts focused on optimalization of patient's general condition. The idea of prehabilitation started at the beginning of the 21st century. However, prehabilitation programs in gynecological cancer patients are not standardized and are heterogeneous. The aim of the study it to present the concept of prehabilitation and propose prehabilitation protocol to be introduced in Polish oncological centers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE (Ovid) and PsycINFO databases was conducted using the following keywords: prehabilitation, gynecological, abdominal surgery, and cancer. The primary outcomes were complications, hospitalization stay, intensive care unit transfer rate, blood loss, wound healing, and reoperation rate. The search was performed in July 2022 and covered the period from 1st January 2000 till 30th June 2022. RESULTS: A total number of 1,118 articles have been identified. Out of all eligible papers only 42 fulfilled the research criteria and were included in the study. The analysis showed that there is no standardized prehabilitation protocol for gynecological cancer surgery, although most include three-modal approach - physical activity, nutrition, and psychological intervention. There is no standard model for physical capacity evaluation, however, 1,118 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT) is the most common. Frailty evaluation is based on different measurements that prevent from direct comparison of obtained results between studies. CONCLUSIONS: We are not ready to implement the prehabilitation program in polish oncological centers. The main reason elvicz is: lack of accredited ovarian cancer centers, lack of well-established standardized prehabilitation programs for gynecological malignancies (ovarian cancer especially), and lack of proper information for patients about advantages of adequate preparation elvic expected surgery. Furter studies on different prehabilitation programs and information campaigns both for patients and gynecologist are required to make implementing prehabilitation possible in Poland.

Permanent pacemaker implantation after cardiac surgery: Optimization of the decision making process.

BACKGROUND: Conduction disturbances necessitating permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation after cardiac surgery occur in 1% to 5% of patients. Previous studies have reported a low rate of late PPM dependency, but there is lack of evidence that it might be related to implantation timing. In this study, we sought to determine whether PPM implantation timing and specific conduction disturbances as indications for PPM implantation are associated with late pacemaker dependency and recovery of atrioventricular (AV) conduction. METHODS: Patients with a PPM implanted after cardiac surgery were followed in an outpatient clinic. Two outcomes were assessed: AV conduction recovery and PPM dependency, defined as the absence of intrinsic rhythm on sensing test in VVI mode at 40 bpm. RESULTS: Of 15,092 patients operated between September 2008 and March 2019, 185 (1.2%) underwent PPM implantation. One hundred seventy-seven of these patients met the criteria for inclusion into this study. Follow-up data were available in 145 patients (82%). Implantation was performed at ≤6 days after surgery in 58 patients (40%) and at >6 days after surgery in 87 patients (60%). The median time from implantation to last follow-up was 890 days (range, 416-1998 days). At follow-up, 81 (56%) patients were not PPM dependent. Multivariable analysis showed that PPM implantation at ≤6 days after surgery is a predictor of being not PPM dependent (odds ratio [OR], 5.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.43-12.04; P < .001) and of AV conduction recovery (OR, 4.96; 95% CI, 2.26-10.91; P < .001). Sinus node dysfunction as indication for PPM implantation was predictive of being not PPM dependent (OR, 6.59; 95% CI, 1.67-26.06; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: We recommend implanting a PPM on postoperative day 7 to prevent unnecessary implantations and avoid prolonged hospitalization.

Quality of life in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting with bilateral internal thoracic artery versus single internal thoracic artery.

INTRODUCTION: The left internal thoracic artery to the left anterior descending artery graft is recognized as the gold standard for coronary revascularization. We compared quality of life (QoL) in patients who received bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) and those with a single internal thoracic artery (SITA) graft. AIM: To assess QoL during a 10-year follow-up in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with BITA vs. SITA. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We recruited 300 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who underwent CABG from January 2005 to October 2010. Mean duration (standard deviation - SD) of follow-up was 3568 ±409 days. QoL was measured subjectively using a Likert scale and objectively by the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire. Patients were interviewed by telephone. RESULTS: BITA patients reported marked improvement and improvement more often than SITA patients (58% vs. 43.3%, p = 0.02). Marked deterioration was noted by 2% of BITA patients and 3.3% of SITA patients (p = 0.03). Summarized results of the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire showed significantly better QoL in the BITA group (median: 15.0) vs. SITA group (median: 14.75) (p = 0.02). There were more angina-free patients in the BITA group (84%) compared to SITA patients (72.7%) (p = 0.006). QoL did not correlate with patients' body mass index (p = 0.10) or residence status (p = 0.51), but there was a weak negative correlation between QoL and patients' age (r = -0.14, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical coronary revascularization using BITA improves QoL, particularly when measured by a Likert scale.