Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 331

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized clinical trial of prehabilitation before planned liver resection

Dunne, D F J, Jack, S, Jones, R P, Jones, L, Lythgoe, D T, Malik, H Z, Poston, G J, Palmer, D H, Fenwick, S W·2016·British Journal of Surgery
DOI 10.1002/bjs.10096
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Patients with low fitness as assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) have higher mortality and morbidity after surgery. Preoperative exercise intervention, or prehabilitation, has been suggested as a method to improve CPET values and outcomes. This trial sought to assess the capacity of a 4-week supervised exercise programme to improve fitness before liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis. Methods: This was a randomized clinical trial assessing the effect of a 4-week (12 sessions) high-intensity cycle, interval training programme in patients undergoing elective liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. The primary endpoint was oxygen uptake at the anaerobic threshold. Secondary endpoints included other CPET values and preoperative quality of life (QoL) assessed using the SF-36®. Results: Thirty-eight patients were randomized (20 to prehabilitation, 18 to standard care), and 35 (25 men and 10 women) completed both preoperative assessments and were analysed. The median age was 62 (i.q.r. 54–69) years, and there were no differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Prehabilitation led to improvements in preoperative oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold (+1·5 (95 per cent c.i. 0·2 to 2·9) ml per kg per min) and peak exercise (+2·0 (0·0 to 4·0) ml per kg per min). The oxygen pulse (oxygen uptake per heart beat) at the anaerobic threshold improved (+0·9 (0·0 to 1·8) ml/beat), and a higher peak work rate (+13 (4 to 22) W) was achieved. This was associated with improved preoperative QoL, with the overall SF-36® score increasing by 11 (95 per cent c.i. 1 to 21) (P = 0·028) and the overall SF-36® mental health score by 11 (1 to 22) (P = 0·037). Conclusion: A 4-week prehabilitation programme can deliver improvements in CPET scores and QoL before liver resection. This may impact on perioperative outcome. Registration number: NCT01523353 (https://clinicaltrials.gov).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bjs.10096

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 331

Metadata

Authors
Dunne, D. F. J., Jack, S., Jones, R. P., Jones, L., Lythgoe, D. T., Malik, H. Z., Poston, G. J., Palmer, D. H., & Fenwick, S. W.
Venue
British Journal of Surgery
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2016-02-11
Volume
103
Issue
5
Pages
504-512
ISSN
  • 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2168
DOI
10.1002/bjs.10096
OpenAlex
W2271826744
Cited by
331
References
28
FWCI
48.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.