Show simple item record

Authordc.contributor.authorAppiania, Franco
Authordc.contributor.authorAbara, Belén
Authordc.contributor.authorRamírez, Iván
Authordc.contributor.authorAndrade, Christian
Authordc.contributor.authorMelo, Joel
Authordc.contributor.authorBarra, Fernando
Authordc.contributor.authorVerdugo, Fernando Javier
Authordc.contributor.authorRossel Mariángel, Víctor
Authordc.contributor.authorLim, Jongsung
Authordc.contributor.authorDonoso, Erika
Authordc.contributor.authorArrué, Urania
Authordc.contributor.authorRiquelme, María Paz
Admission datedc.date.accessioned2025-01-22T13:18:26Z
Available datedc.date.available2025-01-22T13:18:26Z
Publication datedc.date.issued2025
Cita de ítemdc.identifier.citationTransplantation Proceedings, 000, 1−6 (2025)es_ES
Identifierdc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2024.11.034
Identifierdc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/203005
Abstractdc.description.abstractIntroduction. 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 § 7to 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.es_ES
Lenguagedc.language.isoenes_ES
Publisherdc.publisherElsevieres_ES
Type of licensedc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
Link to Licensedc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
Sourcedc.sourceTransplantation Proceedingses_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectHeart transplantationes_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectLung transplantationes_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectLatin Americaes_ES
Títulodc.titleMultimodal inpatient prehabilitation prior to heart or lung transplantation in a latin american transplant reference centeres_ES
Document typedc.typeArtículo de revistaes_ES
dc.description.versiondc.description.versionVersión aceptada para publicar - Postprintes_ES
dcterms.accessRightsdcterms.accessRightsAcceso abiertoes_ES
Catalogueruchile.catalogadorlajes_ES
Indexationuchile.indexArtículo de publicación WoSes_ES


Files in this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States