Which frailty score in cardiac surgery patients?

Abstract

Background: Frailty assessment for risk prediction is suggested in elderly patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We aimed to compare five different frailty tests.

Methods: Relation of Edmonton Frailty Score (EFS), Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP), FRAIL (Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness, and Loss of weight), Katz and hand grip strength (HGS) tests to each other, postoperative outcomes and mortality rates were evaluated prospectively in 140 consecutive patients aged ≥65 years.

Results: The median follow-up period was 880.5 (range, 0 to 1,237) days with higher EFS and FFP scores in non-survivors (p<0.05). Patients with any complication had higher EFS (p=0.002), FFP (p=0.004) and FRAIL (p=0,006) scores. Compared to non-frail patients, frail patients' NYHA capacity, EuroSCORE II and STS mortality risks were higher; hemoglobin values and HGS were lower with EFS, FFP, and FRAIL tests. Frail patients' hospitalization periods with EFS (p=0.003) and intensive care unit stay with FFP (p=0.029) were longer. No mortality was observed in non-frail patients according to the FFP test. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) log-rank survival curves showed significant differences in favor of non-frail subgroups according to EFS, FFP and HGS tests (p<0.05). Relative risks for mortality in frail and pre-frail patients were between 0.9 and 4. The FFP was the most sensitive test (area under curve=0.721). There was discordance rather than concordance among five different tests (Kappa <0.411).

Conclusion: For patients aged ≥65 years undergoing heart surgery the FFP can be used safely to determine non-frail patients. Although the EFS seems to be promising to identify frail patients, further large-scale studies using various tests are needed to predict an optimal cut-off value for this patient population.