Key result
The Clinical Frailty Scale score was significantly associated with any postoperative morbidity (OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.42-3.15) in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery, unlike CPET variables.
Why the study?
To investigate the association between cardiopulmonary exercise testing variables and frailty measured by the Clinical Frailty Scale, and compare their ability to predict postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery.
Does the Clinical Frailty Scale predict postoperative morbidity as effectively as Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in adult patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery?
Cohort (n=317)
No
Does the Clinical Frailty Scale predict postoperative morbidity as effectively as Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in adult patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery?
The Clinical Frailty Scale may serve as a less expensive and effective alternative to CPET for predicting overall postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery.
CFS may predict morbidity independently of CPET after major abdominal cancer surgery; leaves open whether frailty scales can supplant preoperative exercise testing.
Background The primary outcome of this study is to investigate the association between the cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) variables: anaerobic threshold (AT), peak oxygen uptake (VO 2 peak), peak work rate (WR), ventilatory equivalence of CO 2 (VE/VCO 2 ) at the anaerobic threshold (AT) with frailty, measured by the clinical frailty scale (CFS) in patients planned to undergo major abdominal cancer surgery. The secondary outcome is to compare the CPET variables (VO 2 peak, peak WR, VE/VCO 2 at AT) with frailty measured by the CFS in predicting postoperative surgical morbidity in patients following major abdominal cancer surgery. Methods This study was a single‐centre prospective cohort analysis of consecutive adult patients undergoing CPET and CFS scoring as part of their pre‐operative work‐up for major abdominal cancer surgery. Results A total of n = 317 patients underwent CPET and CFS assessment ahead of planned abdominal oncological surgery. Negative correlations were observed between the CPET variables: AT − 0.42 p < 0.01; VO 2 peak − 0.53 p < 0.01; peak WR − 0.54 p < 0.01 with CFS scores and a positive correlation between CFS scores and VE/VCO 2 0.29 p < 0.01. Only CFS remained statistically significant in a multivariate model OR 2.11 (1.42–3.15) 95% CI associated with Clavien–Dindo (CD) ≥ 1 defined morbidity including the significant univariate variables (VO 2 peak, peak WR and CFS scores). No variables were associated with CD ≥ 3 morbidity. Conclusions In patients scheduled to have major abdominal cancer surgery there was a weak association between poor performance on CPET and increasing frailty measured by the CFS. The CFS score unlike CPET was associated with all post‐operative morbidity, but not major complications alone, in these patients. This suggests that CFS may be used as a less expensive alternative to CPET for predicting any postoperative morbidity in major abdominal cancer surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
O’Mahony et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Major abdominal cancer surgery (n=317). Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) vs. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) was evaluated on Clavien-Dindo (CD) ≥ 1 defined morbidity (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.42-3.15). The Clinical Frailty Scale score was significantly associated with any postoperative morbidity (OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.42-3.15) in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery, unlike CPET variables.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: