Key result
The Clinical Frailty Score predicted 30-day mortality after emergency laparotomy (AUC 0.71; 95% CI 0.65-0.77), although the NELA risk calculator performed better (AUC 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.89).
Why the study?
Preoperative frailty predicts outcomes of older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy, but its predictive value across all ages compared with an established perioperative prognostic score remained unassessed.
Does the Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) predict outcomes compared to the NELA risk calculator in adults undergoing emergency laparotomy?
Cohort
Yes
Does the Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) predict outcomes compared to the NELA risk calculator in adults undergoing emergency laparotomy?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.71 (95% CI 0.65-0.77)
While the NELA score is a stronger predictor of 30-day mortality, the Clinical Frailty Score remains a useful preoperative prognostic tool for adults undergoing emergency laparotomy.
NELA outperforms CFS for 30-day mortality prediction without incremental value; leaves open CFS role in other outcomes or populations.
AIM: There is evolving evidence that preoperative frailty predicts outcomes of older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy (EmLap). We assessed frailty scoring in an emergency surgical population that included patients of all ages and then compared this to an established perioperative prognostic score. METHOD: Data from the prospective Emergency Laparoscopic and Laparotomy Scottish Audit (ELLSA; November 2017-October 2018) was used. All adults over 18 were included. Frailty was measured using 7-point clinical frailty score (CFS). OUTCOME MEASURES: 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission. Areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for CFS (1-7) and compared to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) score with Forest plots used to compare 30-day mortality across CFS and NELA categories. RESULTS: 78.2, p < 0.001) and median LOS (10 days CFS1 to 20 days CFS6 and 7; p < 0.001). Readmission rates did not differ significantly across CFS. ROC (95% CI) for mortality was 0.71 (0.65-0.77) for CFS and 0.84 (0.78-0.89) for NELA. Addition of CFS to NELA did not increase ROC value. CONCLUSION: This study supports the prognostic role of frailty in the emergency surgical setting, finding increasing frailty to be associated with increased mortality and longer LOS in adults of all ages. Although NELA performed better, CFS remained predictive and has the advantage of being calculated preoperatively to aid decision-making and treatment planning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Palaniappan et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Emergency laparotomy. Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) vs. National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) risk calculator was evaluated on 30-day mortality (AUC 0.71, 95% CI 0.65-0.77). The Clinical Frailty Score predicted 30-day mortality after emergency laparotomy (AUC 0.71; 95% CI 0.65-0.77), although the NELA risk calculator performed better (AUC 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.89).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: