• Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2021

    Comparative Study

    A Bayesian Comparison of Frailty Instruments in Noncardiac Surgery: A Cohort Study.

    • Daniel I McIsaac, Sylvie D Aucoin, and Carl van Walraven.
    • From the Departments of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Ottawa and The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
    • Anesth. Analg. 2021 Aug 1; 133 (2): 366373366-373.

    BackgroundFrailty-a multidimensional syndrome related to age- and disease-related deficits-is a key risk factor for older surgical patients. However, it is unknown which frailty instrument most accurately predicts postoperative outcomes. Our objectives were to quantify the probability of association and relative predictive performance of 2 frailty instruments (ie, the risk analysis index-administrative [RAI-A] and 5-item modified frailty index [mFI-5]) with postoperative outcomes in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data.MethodsRetrospective cohort study using Bayesian analysis of NSQIP hospitals. Adults having inpatient small or large bowel surgery 2010-2015 (derivation cohort) or intermediate to high risk mixed noncardiac surgery in 2016 (validation cohort) had preoperative frailty assigned using 2 unique approaches (RAI-A and mFI-5). Probabilities of association were calculated based on posterior distributions and relative predictive performance using posterior predictive distributions and Bayes factors for 30-day mortality (primary outcome) and serious complications (secondary outcome).ResultsOf 50,630 participants, 7630 (14.0%) died and 19,545 (38.6%) had a serious complication. Without adjustment, the RAI-A and mFI-5 had >99% probability being associated with mortality with a ≥2.0 odds ratio (ie, large effect size). After adjustment for NSQIP risk calculator variables, only the RAI-A had ≥95% probability of a nonzero association with mortality. Similar results arose when predicting postoperative complications. The RAI-A provided better predictive accuracy for mortality than the mFI-5 (minimum Bayes factor 3.25 × 1014), and only the RAI-A improved predictive accuracy beyond that of the NSQIP risk calculator (minimum Bayes factor = 4.27 × 1013). Results were consistent in leave-one-out cross-validation.ConclusionsTranslation of frailty-related findings from research and quality improvement studies to clinical care and surgical planning will be aided by a consistent approach to measuring frailty with a multidimensional instrument like RAI-A, which appears to be superior to the mFI-5 when predicting outcomes for inpatient noncardiac surgery.Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…