Stacie Deiner1, Xiaoyu Liu2, Hung-Mo Lin2, Frederick Sieber3, Kenneth Boockvar4, Mary Sano4, Mark G Baxter2. 1. Gustave Levy Place, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: Stacie.deiner@mssm.edu. 2. Gustave Levy Place, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 3. Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Gustave Levy Place, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few perioperative studies have assessed subjective cognitive complaint (SCC) in combination with neuropsychological testing. New nomenclature guidelines require both SCC and objective decline on cognitive testing. The objective of our study was to compare SCC and neuropsychological testing in an elderly surgical cohort. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort trial at a single urban medical centre. We included patients older than 65 yr, undergoing major non-cardiac surgery with general anaesthesia. Those with dementia or inability to consent were excluded, as were those undergoing emergency, cardiac, or intracranial procedures. Patients completed a neuropsychiatry battery before and 3 months after surgery. SCC was defined utilising the single question: 'do you feel that surgery and anaesthesia have impacted your clarity of thought?' Objective cognitive decline was defined as 1 standard deviation decline from the baseline of the cohort. RESULTS: Of the 120 patients who completed assessments, 16/120 (13%) had SCC after surgery, and 41/120 (34%) had objective decline. The sensitivity of SCC in relation to objective decline was 24% and specificity was 92%. Of the patients with SCC, 43.8% were screened positive for depression after surgery compared with 4.9% without SCC; P=0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with objective cognitive decline did not report SCC. There appears to be a relationship between SCC and depression. The use of SCC in surgical patients to define postoperative neurocognitive disorders needs to be better delineated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02650687.
BACKGROUND: Few perioperative studies have assessed subjective cognitive complaint (SCC) in combination with neuropsychological testing. New nomenclature guidelines require both SCC and objective decline on cognitive testing. The objective of our study was to compare SCC and neuropsychological testing in an elderly surgical cohort. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort trial at a single urban medical centre. We included patients older than 65 yr, undergoing major non-cardiac surgery with general anaesthesia. Those with dementia or inability to consent were excluded, as were those undergoing emergency, cardiac, or intracranial procedures. Patients completed a neuropsychiatry battery before and 3 months after surgery. SCC was defined utilising the single question: 'do you feel that surgery and anaesthesia have impacted your clarity of thought?' Objective cognitive decline was defined as 1 standard deviation decline from the baseline of the cohort. RESULTS: Of the 120 patients who completed assessments, 16/120 (13%) had SCC after surgery, and 41/120 (34%) had objective decline. The sensitivity of SCC in relation to objective decline was 24% and specificity was 92%. Of the patients with SCC, 43.8% were screened positive for depression after surgery compared with 4.9% without SCC; P=0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with objective cognitive decline did not report SCC. There appears to be a relationship between SCC and depression. The use of SCC in surgical patients to define postoperative neurocognitive disorders needs to be better delineated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02650687.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: L S Rasmussen; T Johnson; H M Kuipers; D Kristensen; V D Siersma; P Vila; J Jolles; A Papaioannou; H Abildstrom; J H Silverstein; J A Bonal; J Raeder; I K Nielsen; K Korttila; L Munoz; C Dodds; C D Hanning; J T Moller Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 2.105
Authors: Tim Johnson; Terri Monk; Lars S Rasmussen; Hanne Abildstrom; Peter Houx; Kari Korttila; Harrie M Kuipers; Chris D Hanning; Volkert D Siersma; Diana Kristensen; Jaume Canet; Maria Teresa Ibañaz; Jakob T Moller Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: B Winblad; K Palmer; M Kivipelto; V Jelic; L Fratiglioni; L-O Wahlund; A Nordberg; L Bäckman; M Albert; O Almkvist; H Arai; H Basun; K Blennow; M de Leon; C DeCarli; T Erkinjuntti; E Giacobini; C Graff; J Hardy; C Jack; A Jorm; K Ritchie; C van Duijn; P Visser; R C Petersen Journal: J Intern Med Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: M Dustin Boone; Hung-Mo Lin; Xiaoyu Liu; Jong Kim; Mary Sano; Mark G Baxter; Frederick E Sieber; Stacie G Deiner Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2021-12-03 Impact factor: 1.977
Authors: Deborah M Oyeyemi; Mary Cooter; Stacey Chung; Heather E Whitson; Jeffrey N Browndyke; Michael J Devinney; Patrick J Smith; Grant E Garrigues; Eugene Moretti; Judd W Moul; Harvey Jay Cohen; Joseph P Mathew; Miles Berger Journal: J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol Date: 2020-12-30 Impact factor: 2.680