Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41782467›Full record

Trial reportClinical transplantation2026

PRehab tO PreparE Living Liver Donors for Enhanced Recovery (PROPELLER): A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

Daniel Sibley, Hance Clarke, Ian Randall, Darren Au, Priya Brahmbhatt, Nazia Selzner, Dmitry Rozenberg, Elena West, Chantal Wiggins, Alana Long and 11 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical transplantation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Daniel SibleyFaculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3238-4083
Hance ClarkeDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ian RandallDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Darren AuDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Priya BrahmbhattFaculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Nazia SelznerFaculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9435-2597
Dmitry RozenbergFaculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8786-9152
Elena WestAjmera Transplant Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Chantal WigginsAjmera Transplant Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Alana LongDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sonia MunozDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Calvin MachDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6875-3127
Laura McKinneyDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew G MatthewPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Mark CattralFaculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Istvan MucsiFaculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4781-4699
Paul OhFaculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0603-6958
Daniel SellersDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Stuart McCluskeyDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6684-0497
Miki PeerDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Daniel Santa MinaFaculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4361-1656

Funding

Canadian Society of Transplantation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreserving health and quality of life are priorities of care for living liver donors (LLDs) due to their altruistic contribution to recipients. No study has examined the role of multimodal prehabilitation for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Prior to determining the efficacy of prehabilitation in LLDs, a feasibility study is required.

methodsThe objective of this feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to assess the feasibility of conducting a large-scale RCT of prehabilitation prior to LDLT. Thirty LLDs at Toronto General Hospital were randomized 2:1 to receive multimodal prehabilitation or usual care, respectively. The prehabilitation intervention comprised: (1) exercise, (2) nutrition support, (3) psychological counselling, and (4) LLD peer mentor sessions. The primary outcome was feasibility via rates of recruitment, retention, adverse events, adherence, and healthcare provider engagement. Clinical, patient-reported, and physical fitness outcomes were collected at baseline, preoperatively, and at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. Qualitative interviews were used to assess feasibility and satisfaction with the intervention.

resultsSixty-three patients were eligible and 30 enrolled (48%). Participants' mean age was 42 ± 8 and 67% were female. There were no intervention-related adverse events. Attrition was 33% and adherence across each of the components of prehabilitation was ≥75%. Interviews demonstrated satisfaction with the prehabilitation intervention and areas for improvement for a Phase III RCT.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates a Phase III RCT of prehabilitation versus usual care may be feasible in LLDs. The Phase III trial will confirm the preliminary and exploratory physical and psychosocial benefit reported in this study.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT0543136.

Indexed as

HepatectomyLiver TransplantationLiving DonorsPreoperative CarePreoperative ExerciseQuality of LifeAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisfeasibility studiespreoperative exercisetissue donors

Identifiers

PMID41782467
PMCPMC12961420

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.