Modified Frailty Index to Assess Risk in Elderly Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.
Journal
World journal of surgery
ISSN: 1432-2323
Titre abrégé: World J Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7704052
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
accepted:
10
12
2021
pubmed:
14
1
2022
medline:
23
4
2022
entrez:
13
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the postoperative course of elderly patients (≥70 years) submitted to minimally invasive (MIDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and to evaluate if the modified Frailty Index (mFI) predicts the surgical course of elderly patients submitted to DP. Data of patients aged ≥70 who underwent DP at a single institution between March 2011 and December 2019 were retrospectively retrieved. A 2:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences in baseline characteristics. Then, postoperative complications were compared between the two groups (MIDP vs. ODP). Additionally, the entire cohort of DP elderly patients was stratified according to the mFI into three groups: non-frail (mFI = 0), mildly frail (mFI = 1/2), or severely frail (mFI = 3) and then compared. A total of 204 patients were analyzed. After PSM, 40 MIDP and 80 ODP patients were identified. The complications considered stratified homogenously between the two groups, with no statistically significant differences. The severity of the postoperative course increased as mFI did among the three groups regarding any complication (p = 0.022), abdominal collection (p = 0.014), pulmonary complication (p = 0.001), postoperative confusion (p = 0.047), Clavien-Dindo severity ≥3 events (p = 0.036), and length of stay (p = 0.018). Elderly patients can be safely submitted to MIDP. The mFI identifies frail elderly patients more prone to develop surgical and non-surgical complications after DP.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To compare the postoperative course of elderly patients (≥70 years) submitted to minimally invasive (MIDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and to evaluate if the modified Frailty Index (mFI) predicts the surgical course of elderly patients submitted to DP.
METHODS
METHODS
Data of patients aged ≥70 who underwent DP at a single institution between March 2011 and December 2019 were retrospectively retrieved. A 2:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences in baseline characteristics. Then, postoperative complications were compared between the two groups (MIDP vs. ODP). Additionally, the entire cohort of DP elderly patients was stratified according to the mFI into three groups: non-frail (mFI = 0), mildly frail (mFI = 1/2), or severely frail (mFI = 3) and then compared.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 204 patients were analyzed. After PSM, 40 MIDP and 80 ODP patients were identified. The complications considered stratified homogenously between the two groups, with no statistically significant differences. The severity of the postoperative course increased as mFI did among the three groups regarding any complication (p = 0.022), abdominal collection (p = 0.014), pulmonary complication (p = 0.001), postoperative confusion (p = 0.047), Clavien-Dindo severity ≥3 events (p = 0.036), and length of stay (p = 0.018).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Elderly patients can be safely submitted to MIDP. The mFI identifies frail elderly patients more prone to develop surgical and non-surgical complications after DP.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35024923
doi: 10.1007/s00268-021-06436-2
pii: 10.1007/s00268-021-06436-2
pmc: PMC8885554
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
891-900Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Surgery. 2017 Feb;161(2):365-372
pubmed: 27692778
Surg Endosc. 2015 Nov;29(11):3163-70
pubmed: 25552231
Pancreatology. 2020 Sep;20(6):1234-1242
pubmed: 32782197
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Feb;68(2):112-21
pubmed: 25433444
Surg Endosc. 2021 Mar;35(3):1420-1428
pubmed: 32240383
Surg Endosc. 2017 Dec;31(12):5234-5240
pubmed: 28493165
Surg Endosc. 2019 Jul;33(7):2142-2151
pubmed: 30361968
Updates Surg. 2020 Mar;72(1):155-161
pubmed: 32026398
J Surg Res. 2013 Jul;183(1):104-10
pubmed: 23415494
Surg Endosc. 2021 Sep 13;:
pubmed: 34518950
Ann Surg. 2019 Jan;269(1):2-9
pubmed: 30080726
Surgery. 2017 Mar;161(3):584-591
pubmed: 28040257
CMAJ. 2005 Aug 30;173(5):489-95
pubmed: 16129869
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2019 Nov;19(11):947-958
pubmed: 31661984
Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2144-62
pubmed: 23245606
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017 Jan;24(1):42-48
pubmed: 27794204
Surgery. 2021 Apr;169(4):724-731
pubmed: 33268073
Surgery. 2007 Nov;142(5):761-8
pubmed: 17981197
HPB (Oxford). 2012 Oct;14(10):649-57
pubmed: 22954000
ScientificWorldJournal. 2001 Aug 08;1:323-36
pubmed: 12806071
Surgery. 2007 Jul;142(1):20-5
pubmed: 17629996
Surgery. 2016 Oct;160(4):987-996
pubmed: 27545992
Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2016;2016:8052175
pubmed: 28018428
Ann Surg. 2021 Dec 1;274(6):e966-e973
pubmed: 31756173
Surg Endosc. 2018 Jul;32(7):3164-3173
pubmed: 29340813
World J Gastroenterol. 2017 May 7;23(17):3077-3083
pubmed: 28533664
Updates Surg. 2021 Jun;73(3):923-928
pubmed: 32162271
HPB (Oxford). 2013 Jan;15(1):24-30
pubmed: 23216776
Surg Endosc. 2018 May;32(5):2239-2248
pubmed: 29067580
Gerontologist. 2015 Dec;55(6):901-11
pubmed: 26561272
Surgery. 2019 Sep;166(3):271-276
pubmed: 30975498
Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Jun;24(6):1714-1721
pubmed: 28058551
Surgery. 2016 Aug;160(2):272-80
pubmed: 27267548
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017 Feb;29(Suppl 1):41-45
pubmed: 27878555
J Clin Epidemiol. 1994 Nov;47(11):1245-51
pubmed: 7722560
Ann Surg. 2007 Jul;246(1):77-82
pubmed: 17592294