Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Active, not recruiting
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT05671094 |
Other study ID # |
f/2022/154 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Active, not recruiting |
Phase |
N/A
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
January 13, 2023 |
Est. completion date |
December 31, 2024 |
Study information
Verified date |
June 2024 |
Source |
Jessa Hospital |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Interventional
|
Clinical Trial Summary
Current literature on prehabilitation is broad and heterogenous. Ploussard et al initiated a
multimodal one-day prehabilitation program in patients before robotic radical prostatectomy
involving urology nurses, anaesthetic nurses, oncology nurse specialists, anesthesiologists,
dieticians, physiotherapists etc, and observed significant improvement in terms of reduction
in length of stay, blood loss, and operative time, and an increase in the proportion of
ambulant surgery. Santa Mina et al observed that patients following a home-based
moderate-intensity exercise prehabilitation program prior to radical prostatectomy were more
fit i.e have a greater score on the 6 minutes' walk test, four weeks postoperatively compared
to a control group. Regrettably, this study couldn't demonstrate a difference in length of
stay or complication rate. To date, evidence for efficacy of prehabilitation in
gynaecological cancer patients is limited. Several reviews and a meta-analysis indicate that
the level of evidence suggesting that prehabilitation may improve postoperative outcomes is
low. Moreover, there is a wide variability in applied preoperative prehabilitation programs
i.e, with a uni- or multimodal approach, home-based or supervised, differences in intensity
and a variety of outcomes.
Therefore, there is a need for randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias and clearly
defined outcome parameters to clarify the potential benefit of prehabilitation for patients
Hence, the primary goal of this randomized pilot study is to determine the feasibility of the
implementation of a multimodal prehabilitation program in patients undergoing robotic
oncologic urological or gynaecological surgery in a Belgian tertiary center in terms of
protocol adherence and recruitment rate.
Description:
The main elements of established enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) include a minimally
invasive surgical approach when feasible, locoregional analgesia, limited use and duration of
drains, minimized blood loss and perioperative fluid administration, early oral re-nutrition,
respiratory physiotherapy, and early mobilization. These pathways have demonstrated to be
beneficial in the oncological surgery field by reducing hospitalization costs and
peri-operative complications, while maintaining suitable oncological and functional outcomes.
It has to be emphasized that patients who are active and well-functioning prior to surgery,
have fewer complications, recuperate faster, and experience better recovery compared to their
less fit counterparts. Recently, prehabilitation as a strategy to begin the rehabilitation
process before surgery gains more interest. Although there is no single definition of
prehabilitation available, this intervention aims to actively prepare patients before surgery
through exercise, nutritional support, psycho-cognitive training or a combination thereof.
Current literature on prehabilitation is broad and heterogenous. Ploussard et al initiated a
multimodal one-day prehabilitation program in patients before robotic radical prostatectomy
involving urology nurses, anaesthetic nurses, oncology nurse specialists, anesthesiologists,
dieticians, physiotherapists etc, and observed significant improvement in terms of reduction
in length of stay, blood loss, and operative time, and an increase in the proportion of
ambulant surgery. Santa Mina et al observed that patients following a home-based
moderate-intensity exercise prehabilitation program prior to radical prostatectomy were more
fit i.e have a greater score on the 6 minutes' walk test, four weeks postoperatively compared
to a control group. Regrettably, this study couldn't demonstrate a difference in length of
stay or complication rate. To date, evidence for efficacy of prehabilitation in
gynaecological cancer patients is limited. Several reviews and a meta-analysis indicate that
the level of evidence suggesting that prehabilitation may improve postoperative outcomes is
low. Moreover, there is a wide variability in applied preoperative prehabilitation programs
i.e, with a uni- or multimodal approach, home-based or supervised, differences in intensity
and a variety of outcomes.
Therefore, there is a need for randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias and clearly
defined outcome parameters to clarify the potential benefit of prehabilitation for patients
Hence, the primary goal of this randomized pilot study is to determine the feasibility of the
implementation of a multimodal prehabilitation program in patients undergoing robotic
oncologic urological or gynaecological surgery in a Belgian tertiary center in terms of
protocol adherence and recruitment rate.
Study design
This is an observer-blind, randomized controlled, superiority trial. All participants will
receive standardized perioperative care according to established ERAS protocols (main
elements include a minimally invasive surgical approach when feasible, locoregional
analgesia, limited use and duration of drains, minimized blood loss and perioperative fluid
administration, early oral re-nutrition, respiratory physiotherapy, and early mobilization).
The standard preoperative pathway includes risk assessment, medication management and
perioperative blood management.
Randomization
Patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either of the two study groups: an
intervention group undergoing the prehabilitation program and a control group. A block
randomization of 4, stratified per type of surgery, will be performed using a
computer-generated random allocation sequence, created by the study statistician. Allocation
numbers will be sealed in opaque envelopes, which will be opened in sequence by an unblinded
member of the study team after enrollment of a patient into the study. The randomization list
will remain with the study statistician for the whole duration of the study.