Franco Appiani , Belen Abara , Ivan Ramirez , Christian Andrade , Joel Melo , Fernando Barra , Fernando Javier Verdugo , Victor Rossel , Jongsung Lim , Erika Donoso , Urania Arrué , Maria Paz Riquelme
{"title":"Multimodal Inpatient Prehabilitation Prior to Heart or Lung Transplantation in a Latin American Transplant Reference Center","authors":"Franco Appiani , Belen Abara , Ivan Ramirez , Christian Andrade , Joel Melo , Fernando Barra , Fernando Javier Verdugo , Victor Rossel , Jongsung Lim , Erika Donoso , Urania Arrué , Maria Paz Riquelme","doi":"10.1016/j.transproceed.2024.11.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Whether the implementation of a multimodal prehabilitation program is effective and safe for high-risk heart or lung transplantation candidates, whose condition prevents hospital discharge, is unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a retrospective study at a cardiothoracic transplant center in Chile. Two cohorts of hospitalized patients listed for heart or lung transplant were studied: the first underwent traditional (historical) and nonstructured prehabilitation, and the second underwent protocol-driven multimodal prehabilitation (MP). Adverse events and preoperative functional changes in the MP group were documented, as well as comparative postoperative outcomes between both cohorts.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Between 2018 and 2023, 24 transplant recipients were analyzed. During the MP phase, significant improvement was observed in Medical Research Council scale (52.0 ± 7 to 58.7 ± 3; <em>P</em> = .042), sit-to-stand test (7.1 ± 7 to 15.9 ± 6; <em>P</em> = .018), and euthymic state (from 4 to 10 patients; <em>P</em> .036), without reported adverse events. Postoperatively, MP group demonstrated faster standing (1.9 ± 0.7 vs 1.3 ± 0.5 days; <em>P</em> = .05) and sitting times (2.0 ± 0.7 vs 1.2 ± 0.5 days; <em>P</em> = .007), with more early extubations (3 vs 11; <em>P</em> = .003) in comparison to the historical prehabilitation cohort.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In this small retrospective study, MP in hospitalized patients awaiting heart or lung transplantation appears to be safe and associated with improvements in pre- and postoperative outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23246,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation proceedings","volume":"57 2","pages":"Pages 348-354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041134524006791","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Whether the implementation of a multimodal prehabilitation program is effective and safe for high-risk heart or lung transplantation candidates, whose condition prevents hospital discharge, is unclear.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective study at a cardiothoracic transplant center in Chile. Two cohorts of hospitalized patients listed for heart or lung transplant were studied: the first underwent traditional (historical) and nonstructured prehabilitation, and the second underwent protocol-driven multimodal prehabilitation (MP). Adverse events and preoperative functional changes in the MP group were documented, as well as comparative postoperative outcomes between both cohorts.
Results
Between 2018 and 2023, 24 transplant recipients were analyzed. During the MP phase, significant improvement was observed in Medical Research Council scale (52.0 ± 7 to 58.7 ± 3; P = .042), sit-to-stand test (7.1 ± 7 to 15.9 ± 6; P = .018), and euthymic state (from 4 to 10 patients; P .036), without reported adverse events. Postoperatively, MP group demonstrated faster standing (1.9 ± 0.7 vs 1.3 ± 0.5 days; P = .05) and sitting times (2.0 ± 0.7 vs 1.2 ± 0.5 days; P = .007), with more early extubations (3 vs 11; P = .003) in comparison to the historical prehabilitation cohort.
Conclusion
In this small retrospective study, MP in hospitalized patients awaiting heart or lung transplantation appears to be safe and associated with improvements in pre- and postoperative outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Transplantation Proceedings publishes several different categories of manuscripts, all of which undergo extensive peer review by recognized authorities in the field prior to their acceptance for publication.
The first type of manuscripts consists of sets of papers providing an in-depth expression of the current state of the art in various rapidly developing components of world transplantation biology and medicine. These manuscripts emanate from congresses of the affiliated transplantation societies, from Symposia sponsored by the Societies, as well as special Conferences and Workshops covering related topics.
Transplantation Proceedings also publishes several special sections including publication of Clinical Transplantation Proceedings, being rapid original contributions of preclinical and clinical experiences. These manuscripts undergo review by members of the Editorial Board.
Original basic or clinical science articles, clinical trials and case studies can be submitted to the journal?s open access companion title Transplantation Reports.