Prehabilitation in thoracic surgery

Surgical resection remains the best treatment option for patients with early stage of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it may be responsible of postoperative complication and mortality, especially in patients with impaired pulmonary function. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been focused mainly in minimal invasive surgery approach during lung resection and respiratory rehabilitation after surgery. Preoperative exercise-based intervention (prehabilitation) has demonstrated reduction of morbi-mortality in other surgeries but in thoracic surgery continues to be under discussion. Cardio-pulmonary exercise test (CPET) is the gold standard technique to predict postoperative morbi-mortality. The implementation of a preoperative respiratory rehabilitation could optimize patient’s physical capacity before surgery and improve outcomes and enhance recovery. The aim of this systematic review of the literature is to identify the effectiveness and safety of prehabilitation programs in thoracic surgery, the type of exercise and its duration, and the group of patients with best benefit. Prehabilitation is a safe intervention without side effects in patients. High-intensity interval training (HIT) with duration of 2 to 6 weeks seems to be the best exercise programme in a prehabilitation intervention but it exists heterogeneity in terms of intensity and duration. Prehabilitation increase exercise capacity and significantly enhances pulmonary function. But the reduction of postoperative complication and mortality has not been clearly demonstrated. Different criteria selection, type of intervention and small sample size, in addition to no randomization, could justify disparate results. It seems that not all patients can benefit from prehabilitation and it could be indicated only in patients with impaired lung function. Further randomized clinical trials with enough patients, correct duration of HIT (2 to 6 weeks) and focused in COPD patients are needed to clarify the suitability of prehabilitation. Meanwhile, safety of prehabilitation and good results of some studies support this intervention in high-risk patients.