Surgical outcomes, in broad terms, have never been better or more transparent, despite the contemporary challenges of an increasingly elderly, comorbid, and sometimes frail population. High-risk surgical patients are at greater danger of post-operative complications, prolonged durations of hospital stay, and recovery in general blighted by a compromised quality of life. Moreover, patients diagnosed with cancer face and pose specific problems, including debility, weight loss, malnutrition, and anemia that may all impact outcomes. This is the first study to highlight the prognostic significance of post-operative morbidity severity classification after D2 gastrectomy for carcinoma. The principal findings supported the working hypothesis and showed that the one third of the patients who suffered any complication were 40% less likely to enjoy disease-free 5-year survival. The poorer survival associated with post-operative complications was independent of tumor histopathological stage, suggesting that treatment strategies aimed at minimizing complications may not only improve oncological outcome but also reduce lengths of hospital stay, improve quality of life, with allied consequent economic benefits for hospital services and prudent NHS health care.
Patients carrying significant comorbidities, poor functional performance, and higher risk assessment profiles are well recognized to suffer poorer post-operative quality of life and cumulative survival following abdominal surgery.12 Yet, only recently have the associations between pre-operative physiological functional status and post-operative disease recurrence been appreciated.2 Richards et al. reported in a cohort of patients from Glasgow, Scotland, with pTNM stage I–III colorectal cancer that poor pre-operative POSSUM scores were 50%more likely to develop post-operative complications and disease recurrence.2 Similarly, Kang et al. (South Korea),13 Zhang et al. (China), and 14 Inokuchi (Tokyo)15 have reported an association between pre-operative serum albumin and surgical complications in patients undergoing gastrectomy for cancer, which suggest that the systemic inflammatory response plays a pivotal role. Unfortunately, these latter reports focused only on serum albumin analyses and, other SIR biomarkers such as the C-reactive protein-based modified Glasgow Prognostic Score, may provide better prognostic information. Indeed, in a recent report comparing a raft of all serum-based inflammatory biomarkers, the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) was the only inflammatory marker independently associated with disease recurrence and overall survival.16 Measures that optimize the patients’ risk assessment profiles may offer the greatest therapeutic benefit, and the magnitude of these benefits has been signaled in a recent report form Barberan-Garcia et al. (Barcelona) who observed a 51% reduction in post-operative morbidity in patients undergoing intensive prehabilitation programs prior to major abdominal surgery.17
The adverse influence of global post-operative morbidity on overall survival has been reported previously. Li et al. from China1 reported significantly poorer 5-year overall survival in a cohort of 432 patients when morbidity occurred (21.8%) compared with controls (39.9%), which was independent of confounding factors (HR 2.5. p < 0.001). However, the value of overall survival as an outcome measure is relatively limited because of the inclusion of non-cancer-related deaths in the analysis, diluting the prognostic influence of cancer biology. In contrast, septic complications after surgery have been implicated in influencing disease-free survival.18,19 Both Tokunga et al.18 (n = 756) and Hayashi et al.19 (Japan) (n = 502) contended that sepsis was associated with poorer disease-free 5-year survival of the order of 20% (HR 2.22, p = 0.002) and 25% (HR 1.96, p = 0.013), respectively. The findings of this study are not in keeping with the above, but are in line with those reported by Nelen et from the Netherlands20 with sepsis associated with 33.1% poorer disease-free 5-year survival. Moreover, respiratory sepsis was fourfold greater in western cohorts (20%)20 when compared with eastern cohorts (5%).19
There are a number of inherent limitations and potential criticisms of this study. Data related to the patients’ race, body mass indices, and detailed comorbidity was not collected prospectively and was therefore not available for analysis as confounding factors. The patient cohort studied is a selected group (most had undergone a potentially curative R0 gastrectomy) and was not representative of all gastric cancer patients; indeed, only approximately one third of the South Wales patients undergo potentially curative resection.21 In contrast, the study has several strengths, benefiting from robust follow-up data with accurate causes and dates of death obtained from the office of national statistics; over 75% were followed up for at least 5 years or death. Patients were recruited consecutively from a single UK geographical region, and all had been treated by the same multidisciplinary team and group of specialist surgeons, using a standardized staging algorithm and operative technique, with extensive audited and published quality control. Moreover, the findings cannot be criticized because of poor surgical outcomes, which compare favorably with national trial and audit data in terms of post-operative morbidity and cumulative survival.5,6
In conclusion, the concept of surgical prehabilitation refers to an emerging field of research concerned with strategies to optimize the patients’ preoperative physical and psychosocial risk profiles, such that post-operative recovery trajectories are boosted, resulting in fewer complications, shorter durations of hospital stay, improved quality of life, and cost-effective prudent health care. Reports to date have focused on a heterogenous group of health interventions, applied within the care continuum, and occurring between the diagnosis and the start of surgical treatment. These have included, education, exercise, nutrition, and psychosocial approaches, focused not only the patient but also the patient’s family, with the aim of promoting health-related behavioral change that reaches beyond the immediate preoperative period into the future and longer term. Prehabilitation is the logical precursor to enhanced recovery programmes but should comprise more than just exercise. Nutritional and psychosocial well-being are also critical aspects of perioperative care and key components of prehabilitation programs. The preoperative period presents an opportunity to utilize a so-called “teachable moment” and emphasize the importance of positive lifestyle change such as smoking cessation. Future research efforts should explore combining and fusing prehabilitation with enhanced recovery programmes to catalyze additional improvements in outcomes. Moreover, cost-effectiveness evaluation should form part of future research. Prehabilitation in specialties with high-risk profiles will probably be associated with additional costs, though it is possible, if not likely, that such costs would be offset by improved outcomes such as shorter durations of hospital stay, fewer complications, and better quality of life. Finally and by tradition, prehabilitation programs are prescriptive and generic: employing a one size fits all philosophy. Bespoke personalized programs, related to the individual patients’ physiological, functional, psychosocial profiles, and including combinations of supervised and independent self-assessed exercises, delivered in the community rather than secondary care are likely to be associated with greater compliance and effect.