Frailty, Aging, and Cardiovascular Surgery

Recommendations for Preoperative Assessment and Shared Decision-Making in Cardiac Surgery

Purpose of review

Recommendations about shared decision-making and guidelines on preoperative evaluation of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery are abundant, but respective recommendations for cardiac surgery are sparse. We provide an overview of available evidence.

Recent findings

While there currently is no consensus statement on the preoperative anesthetic evaluation and shared decision-making for the adult patient undergoing cardiac surgery, evidence pertaining to specific organ systems is available.

Summary

We provide a comprehensive review of available evidence pertaining to preoperative assessment and shared decision-making for patients undergoing cardiac surgery and recommend a thorough preoperative workup in this vulnerable population.

Preoperative Optimization and Choreographed Physiological Evaluation for Resection of Giant Abdominal Neoplasm: A Case Report

Giant ovarian cystadenoma is a rare and often late presentation. The mass effect of such tumors can lead to profound respiratory and cardiovascular compromise, predominately through inferior vena cava compression, but also restriction of normal lung function through transdiaphragmatic mass effect and, as is seen in this case, cardiac tamponade. In this article, the authors outline an expedited program of preoperative optimization and a choreographed physiological assessment strategy to functionally assess the hemodynamic consequences of a giant ovarian mucinous neoplasm, thereby informing the safe conduct of anesthesia and surgery.

PREhabilitation for improving QUality of recovery after ELective cardiac surgery (PREQUEL) study: protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome in which multiple small physiological deficits accumulate gradually, resulting in a loss of physiological reserve and adaptability, putting a patient that is exposed to a stressor at a higher risk of adverse outcomes. Both pre-frailty and frailty are associated with poor patient outcomes and higher healthcare costs. The effect of a prehabilitation programme and standard care on the quality of recovery in pre-frail and frail patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery will be compared.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

A single-centre, superiority, stratified randomised controlled trial with a blinded outcome assessment and intention-to-treat analysis. Pre-frail and frail patients awaiting elective coronary artery bypass graft, with or without valvular repair/replacement, will be recruited. 164 participants will be randomly assigned to either prehabilitation (intervention) or standard care (no intervention) groups. The prehabilitation group will attend two sessions/week of structured exercise (aerobic and resistance) training, supervised by a physiotherapist, for 6-10 weeks before surgery with early health promotion advice in addition to standard care. The standard care group will receive the usual routine care (no prehabilitation). Frailty will be assessed at baseline, hospital admission and at 1 and 3 months after surgery. The primary outcomes will be participants' perceived quality of recovery (15-item Quality of Recovery questionnaire) after surgery (day 3), days at home within 30 days of surgery and the changes in WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score between baseline and at 1 and 3 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes will include major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, psychological distress levels, health-related quality of life and healthcare costs.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Joint CUHK-NTEC Clinical Research Ethics Committee approved the study protocol (CREC Ref. No. 2017.696 T). The findings will be presented at scientific meetings, in peer-reviewed journals and to study participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR1800016098; Pre-results.

A Comparison of Three Frailty Indices in Predicting Morbidity and Mortality After On-Pump Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Aortic valve replacement is a high-risk surgery (3%-5%, 30-day mortality) performed on approximately 30,000 elderly patients a year in the United States. Currently, preoperative risk assessment is based on a composite of medical examination and a subjective evaluation for frailty ("eyeball test"). Objective frailty assessment using validated indices has the potential to improve risk stratification. The purpose of this study was to (1) establish whether frailty can predict 30-day mortality and composite morbidity in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement and (2) compare the predictive ability of 3 frailty indices in this population.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective cohort study of 3088 patients 65 years old and older undergoing aortic valve replacement surgery (based on current procedure terminology codes) between the years 2006 and 2012 extracted from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Frailty was assessed using the modified frailty index, risk analysis index, and Ganapathi indices. Outcomes measured were 30-day mortality and composite morbidity (myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, reintubation, renal insufficiency, coma >24 hours, urinary tract infections, sepsis, deep vein thrombosis, deep wound surgical site infection, superficial site infection, and reoperation).

RESULTS

Frailty was a better predictor of mortality than morbidity, and it was not markedly different among any of the 3 indices. Frailty was associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality and longer lengths of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty can predict mortality in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. Choice of frailty index does not make a difference in this patient population.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in nonagenarians: selectively feasible or extravagantly futile?

A growing number of nonagenarians is recorded as life expectancy increases. Unfortunately, this extreme-aged group is plagued by increased prevalence of aortic stenosis amidst a higher occurrence of comorbidities that pose dilemmas to cardiologists and cardiac surgeons when having to choose a conservative or interventional treatment modality, and a surgical or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) approach. TAVI is an expensive procedure, which also confers a higher mortality and morbidity risk in nonagenarians, compared to younger patients. Considering the physiologic rather the chronologic age alone, and adopting a shared-decision making approach (participatory medicine), it may be more realistic to determine a patient's candidacy for this non-surgical therapeutic modality. Thus, it comes down to the patient selection process by having the heart team review each nonagenarian case individually and getting the patient and the family involved, always aiming to prolong and improve patient's quality of life (QoL), but also taking into consideration patient preferences and values, sharing and respecting goals, realistic expectations, and end-of-life views and ideas. One should keep in mind that there is always the possibility that TAVI may be clinically futile for patients who have a multitude of comorbidities and extreme frailty, for whom a transition to palliative care might be prudent. Selecting nonagenarian patients with low comorbidity index and with no extreme frailty, adopting a minimalistic approach and paying attention to vascular access hemostasis may provide the elements that may lead to a successful, desirable and hopefully cost-effective outcome.