Arielle Hodari1, Zane T Hammoud2, Jamil F Borgi3, Athanasios Tsiouris3, Ilan S Rubinfeld3. 1. Department of General Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan. Electronic address: ahodari1@hfhs.org. 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan. 3. Department of General Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This retrospective study examined use of a modified frailty index as a potential predictor of morbidity and mortality in esophagectomy patients. METHODS: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files were reviewed for 2005 through 2010. Patients undergoing esophagectomy were selected based on CPT codes. A modified frailty index with 11 variables was used to determine correlation between frailty and postesophagectomy morbidity and mortality. Data were analyzed using χ(2) test and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 2,095 patients were included in the analysis. Higher frailty scores were associated with a statistically significant increase in morbidity and mortality. A frailty score of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 had associated morbidity rates of 17.9% (142 of 795 patients), 25.1% (178 of 710 patients), 31.4% (126 of 401 patients), 34.4% (48 of 140 patients), 44.4% (16 of 36 patients), and 61.5% (8 of 13 patients), respectively. A frailty score of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 had associated mortality rates of 1.8% (14 of 795 patients), 3.8% (27 of 710 patients), 4% (16 of 401 patients), 7.1% (10 of 140 patients), 8.3% (3 of 36 patients), and 23.1% (3 of 13 patients), respectively. When using multivariate logistic regression for mortality comparing age, functional status, prealbumin, emergency surgery, wound class, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and sex, only age and frailty were statistically significant. The odds ratio was 31.84 for frailty (p = 0.015) and 1.05 (p = 0.001) for age. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large national database, a modified frailty index was shown to correlate with postesophagectomy morbidity and mortality. Such an index may be used to aid in improving risk assessment and patient selection for esophagectomy.
BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This retrospective study examined use of a modified frailty index as a potential predictor of morbidity and mortality in esophagectomy patients. METHODS: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files were reviewed for 2005 through 2010. Patients undergoing esophagectomy were selected based on CPT codes. A modified frailty index with 11 variables was used to determine correlation between frailty and postesophagectomy morbidity and mortality. Data were analyzed using χ(2) test and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 2,095 patients were included in the analysis. Higher frailty scores were associated with a statistically significant increase in morbidity and mortality. A frailty score of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 had associated morbidity rates of 17.9% (142 of 795 patients), 25.1% (178 of 710 patients), 31.4% (126 of 401 patients), 34.4% (48 of 140 patients), 44.4% (16 of 36 patients), and 61.5% (8 of 13 patients), respectively. A frailty score of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 had associated mortality rates of 1.8% (14 of 795 patients), 3.8% (27 of 710 patients), 4% (16 of 401 patients), 7.1% (10 of 140 patients), 8.3% (3 of 36 patients), and 23.1% (3 of 13 patients), respectively. When using multivariate logistic regression for mortality comparing age, functional status, prealbumin, emergency surgery, wound class, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and sex, only age and frailty were statistically significant. The odds ratio was 31.84 for frailty (p = 0.015) and 1.05 (p = 0.001) for age. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large national database, a modified frailty index was shown to correlate with postesophagectomy morbidity and mortality. Such an index may be used to aid in improving risk assessment and patient selection for esophagectomy.
Authors: J Matthew Reinersman; Mark S Allen; Claude Deschamps; Mark K Ferguson; Francis C Nichols; K Robert Shen; Dennis A Wigle; Stephen D Cassivi Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Christopher C Stahl; Dennis J Hanseman; Koffi Wima; Jeffrey M Sutton; Gregory C Wilson; Samuel F Hohmann; Shimul A Shah; Daniel E Abbott Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2014-05-28 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Dhruvin H Hirpara; Biniam Kidane; Patrik Rogalla; Marcelo Cypel; Marc de Perrot; Shaf Keshavjee; Andrew Pierre; Thomas Waddell; Kazuhiro Yasufuku; Gail E Darling Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-11-14 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ryan C Broderick; Arielle M Lee; Rachel R Blitzer; Beiqun Zhao; Jenny Lam; Joslin N Cheverie; Bryan J Sandler; Garth R Jacobsen; Mark W Onaitis; Kaitlyn J Kelly; Michael Bouvet; Santiago Horgan Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Munyaradzi Chimukangara; Melissa C Helm; Matthew J Frelich; Matthew E Bosler; Lisa E Rein; Aniko Szabo; Jon C Gould Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-10-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mark K Ferguson; Jeanne Farnan; Josh A Hemmerich; Kris Slawinski; Julissa Acevedo; Stephen Small Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 4.330