Impact of frailty on mortality and morbidity in bridge to transplant recipients of contemporary durable mechanical circulatory support.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes in advanced heart failure. We studied the impact of frailty on postoperative outcomes in bridge to transplant (BTT) durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) recipients. METHODS: Patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD, n = 96) or biventricular support (BiV, n = 11) as BTT underwent frailty assessment. Frailty was defined as ≥ 3 physical domains of the Fried's Frailty Phenotype (FFP) or ≥ 2 physical domains of the FFP plus cognitive impairment on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). RESULTS: No difference in mortality at 360 days was observed in frail (n = 6/38, 15.8%) vs non-frail (n = 4/58, 6.9%) LVAD supported patients, p = 0.19. However, there was a significant excess mortality in frail BiV (n = 4/5) vs non-frail BiV (n = 0/6) supported patients, p = 0.013. In all patients, frail patients compared to non-frail patients experienced longer intensive care unit stay, 12 vs 6 days (p < 0.0001) and hospital length of stay, 48 vs 27 days (p < 0.0001). There was no difference in hemocompatibility and infection related adverse events. The majority (n = 22/29, 75.9%) of frail patients became non-frail following MCS; contrastingly, a minority (n = 3/42, 7.1%) became frail from being non-frail (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal markers of frailty are common in patients undergoing BTT-MCS support and those used herein predict mortality in BiV-supported patients, but not in LVAD patients. These findings may help us better identify patients who will benefit most from BiV-BTT therapy.

Validation of Cognitive Impairment in Combination With Physical Frailty as a Predictor of Mortality in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Referred for Heart Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to validate our previous finding that frailty predicts early mortality in patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) and that including cognition in the frailty assessment enhances the prediction of mortality. METHODS: Patients with AHF referred to our Transplant Unit between November 2015 and April 2020 underwent physical frailty assessment using the modified Fried physical frailty (PF) phenotype as well as cognitive assessment using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment to identify patients who were cognitively frail (CogF). We assessed the predictive value of the 2 frailty measures (PF ≥ 3 of 5 = frail; CogF ≥ 3 of 6 = frail) for pretransplant mortality. RESULTS: Three hundred thirteen patients (233 male and 80 female; age 53 ± 13 y) were assessed. Of these, 224 patients (72%) were nonfrail and 89 (28%) were frail using the PF. The CogF assessment identified an additional 30 patients as frail: 119 (38%). Frail patients had significantly increased mortality as compared to nonfrail patients. Ventricular assist device and heart transplant-censored survival at 12 mo was 92 ± 2 % for nonfrail and 69 ± 5% for frail patients (P < 0.0001) using the CogF instrument. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates our previously published findings that frailty is prevalent in patients with AHF referred for heart transplantation. PF predicts early mortality. The addition of cognitive assessment to the physical assessment of frailty identifies an additional cohort of patients with a similarly poor prognosis.

Frailty Measures in Patients Listed for Lung Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to determine whether the addition of cognitive impairment, depression, or both, to the assessment of physical frailty (PF) is associated with the risk of lung transplant (LTX) waitlist mortality. METHODS: Since March 2013, all patients referred for LTX evaluation underwent PF assessment. Cognition was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and depression assessed using the Depression in Medical Illness questionnaire. We assessed the association of 4 composite frailty measures: PF ≥3 of 5 = frail, cognitive frailty (CogF ≥3 of 6 = frail), depressive frailty (DepF ≥3 of 6 = frail), and combined frailty (ComF ≥3 of 7 = frail) with waitlist mortality. RESULTS: The prevalence of PF was 78 (22%), CogF 100 (28%), DepF 105 (29%), and ComF 124 (34%). Waitlist survival in the non-PF group was 94% ± 2% versus 71% ± 7% in the PF group (P < 0.001). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis demonstrated that PF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 4.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.06-11.56), mild cognitive impairment (adjusted HR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.05-8.78), and hypoalbuminemia (adjusted HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.97) were independent predictors of waitlist mortality. There was no significant difference in the area under the curve of the 4 frailty measures. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of cognitive function and depression variables to the PF assessment increased the number of patients classified as frail. However, the addition of these variables does not strengthen the association with LTX waitlist mortality compared with the PF measure.

The impact of frailty on mortality after heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is prevalent in the patients with advanced heart failure; however, its impact on clinical outcomes after heart transplantation (HTx) is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of pre-transplant frailty on mortality and the duration of hospitalization after HTx. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the post-transplant outcomes of 140 patients with advanced heart failure who had undergone frailty assessment within the 6-month interval before HTx: 43 of them were frail (F) and 97 were non-frail (NF). RESULTS: Post-transplant survival rates for the NF cohort at 1 and 12 months were 97% (93-100) and 95% (91-99) (95% CI), respectively. In contrast, post-transplant survival rates for the F cohort at the same time points were 86% (76-96) and 74% (60-84) (p < 0.0008 vs NF cohort), respectively. The Cox proportional hazards regression analysis demonstrated that pre-transplant frailty was an independent predictor of post-transplant mortality with a hazard ratio of 3.8 (95% CI: 1.4-10.5). Intensive care unit and hospital length of stay were 2 and 7 days longer in the F cohort (both p < 0.05), respectively, than in the NF cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty within 6 months before HTx is independently associated with increased mortality and prolonged hospitalization after transplantation. Future research should focus on the development of strategies to mitigate the adverse effects of pre-transplant frailty.

Reversibility of Frailty after Lung Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Frailty contributes to increased morbidity and mortality in patients referred for and undergoing lung transplantation (LTX). The study aim was to determine if frailty is reversible after LTX in those classified as frail at LTX evaluation. METHODS: Consecutive LTX recipients were included. All patients underwent modified physical frailty assessment during LTX evaluation. For patients assessed as frail, frailty was reassessed on completion of the post-LTX rehabilitation program. Frailty was defined by the presence of ≥ 3 domains of the modified Fried Frailty Phenotype (mFFP). RESULTS: We performed 166 lung transplants (frail patients, n = 27, 16%). Eighteen of the 27 frail patients have undergone frailty reassessment. Eight frail patients died, and one interstate recipient did not return for reassessment. In the 18 (66%) patients reassessed, there was an overall reduction in their frailty score post-LTX ((3.4 ± 0.6 to 1.0 ± 0.7), p < 0.001) with 17/18 (94%) no longer classified as frail. Improvements were seen in the following frailty domains: exhaustion, mobility, appetite, and activity. Handgrip strength did not improve posttransplant. CONCLUSIONS: Physical frailty was largely reversible following LTX, underscoring the importance of considering frailty a dynamic, not a fixed, entity. Further work is needed to identify those patients whose frailty is modifiable and establish specific interventions to improve frailty.

Frailty in lung transplantation: a systematic review.

Introduction: Lung transplantation is an effective treatment for certain types of end-stage lung disease. Frailty is a complex clinical syndrome associated with decreased physiological reserve and an increased risk for suboptimal health outcomes.Area covered: This article reviews the current literature on frailty in lung transplantation, with an emphasis on frailty measures, prevalence and impact of frailty on morbidity and mortality prior to and following lung transplantation. Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane systematic review databases were searched to September 2019. The search included the MeSH terms 'frail elderly' or 'frailty' or 'sarcopenia' and 'lung disease' or 'lung transplantation'. Studies were included if: the population were undergoing evaluation for, listed for or received a lung transplant; frailty was prospectively assessed during lung transplant evaluation using systematically defined criteria; used human subjects and; published in English. The prevalence of frailty varied from 0% - 58%. The frailty phenotype and short physical performance battery were the most common measures. Frailty was associated with delisting and death pre-transplantation. Frailty was associated with an increased risk of early mortality post-lung transplantation.Expert opinion: Frailty is identified often in lung transplant candidates and is associated with adverse pre and post-transplantation outcomes. Further research is necessary to identify potential frailty interventions.

Frailty as a Predictor of Mortality in Patients With Interstitial Lung Disease Referred for Lung Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a clinically recognized syndrome of decreased physiological reserve and a key contributor to suboptimal clinical outcomes in various lung disease groups. Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is fast approaching chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as the number one indication for lung transplantation worldwide. Our aim was to assess whether frailty is a predictor of mortality in patients with ILD referred for lung transplantation in an Australian cohort. METHODS: Consecutive patients with ILD referred or on the waiting list for lung transplantation from May 2013 to December 2017 underwent frailty assessment using the modified Fried's frailty phenotype. Frailty was defined as a positive response to ≥3 of the following 5 components: weak grip strength, slowed walking speed, poor appetite, physical inactivity, and exhaustion. RESULTS: One hundred patients (82 male:18 female; age, 59 ± 7 y; range, 30-70) underwent frailty assessment. Twenty-four of 100 (24%) were assessed as frail. Frailty was associated with anemia, hypoalbuminemia, low creatinine, and the use of supplemental oxygen (all P < 0.05). Frailty was independent of age, gender, measures of pulmonary dysfunction (PaO2, forced vital capacity percentage predicted, total lung capacity, total lung capacity percentage predicted, DLCO, or DLCO percentage predicted), cognitive impairment, or depression. Frailty and DLCO % predicted were independent predictors of increased all-cause mortality: 1-year actuarial survival was 86 ± 4% in the nonfrail group compared with 58 ± 10% for the frail group (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is common among patients referred for lung transplant with a diagnosis of ILD and is associated with a marked increase in mortality.

Reversibility of Frailty After Bridge-to-Transplant Ventricular Assist Device Implantation or Heart Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: We recently reported that frailty is independently predictive of increased mortality in patients with advanced heart failure referred for heart transplantation (HTx). The aim of this study was to assess the impact of frailty on short-term outcomes after bridge-to-transplant ventricular assist device (BTT-VAD) implantation and/or HTx and to determine if frailty is reversible after these procedures. METHODS: Between August 2013 and August 2016, 100 of 126 consecutive patients underwent frailty assessment using Fried's Frailty Phenotype before surgical intervention: 40 (21 nonfrail, 19 frail) BTT-VAD and 77 (60 nonfrail, 17 frail) HTx-including 17 of the 40 BTT-VAD supported patients. Postprocedural survival, intubation time, intensive care unit, and hospital length of stay were compared between frail and nonfrail groups. Twenty-six frail patients were reassessed at 2 months or longer postintervention. RESULTS: Frail patients had lower survival (63 ± 10% vs 94 ± 3% at 1 year, P = 0.012) and experienced significantly longer intensive care unit (11 vs 5 days, P = 0.002) and hospital (49 vs 25 days, P = 0.003) length of stay after surgical intervention compared with nonfrail patients. Twelve of 13 frail patients improved their frailty score after VAD (4.0 ± 0.8 to 1.4 ± 1.1, P < 0.001) and 12 of 13 frail patients improved their frailty score after HTx (3.2 ± 0.4 to 0.9 ± 0.9, P < 0.001). Handgrip strength and depression improved postintervention. Only a slight improvement in cognitive function was seen postintervention. CONCLUSIONS: Frail patients with advanced heart failure experience increased mortality and morbidity after surgical intervention with BTT-VAD or HTx. Among those who survive frailty is partly or completely reversible underscoring the importance of considering this factor as a dynamic not fixed entity.

Cognitive impairment improves the predictive validity of physical frailty for mortality in patients with advanced heart failure referred for heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify whether the addition of cognitive impairment, depression, or both, to the assessment of physical frailty provides better outcome prediction in patients with advanced heart failure referred for heart transplantation (HT). METHODS: Beginning in March 2013, all patients with advanced heart failure referred to our Transplant Unit have undergone a physical frailty assessment using the Fried frailty phenotype. Cognition was assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and depression with the Depression in Medical Illness questionnaire. We assessed the value of 4 composite frailty measures: physical frailty (PF ≥ 3 of 5 = frailty), "cognitive frailty" (CogF ≥ 3 of 6 = frail), "depressive frailty" (DepF ≥ 3 of 6 = frail), and "cognitive-depressive frailty" (ComF ≥ 3 of 7 = frail) in predicting outcomes. RESULTS: Frailty was assessed in 156 patients (109 men, 47 women), aged 53 ± 13 years, and with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 27% ± 14%. Inclusion of cognitive impairment or depression in the definition of frailty increased the proportion classified as frail from 33% using PF to 42% using ComF. During follow-up, 28 patients died before ventricular assist device implantation or HT. Frailty was associated with significantly lower ventricular assist device- and HT-free survival, with CogF best capturing early mortality: 12-month survival for non-frail and frail cohorts was 81% ± 5% vs 58% ± 10% (p < 0.02) using PF and 85% ± 5% vs 56% ± 9% (p < 0.002) using CogF. Combining the Depression in Medical Illness score with PF or CogF did not strengthen the relationship between frailty and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of cognitive impairment to the assessment of PF strengthened its capacity to identify advanced heart failure patients referred for HT who are at high risk of early death.

The Prevalence and Prognostic Significance of Frailty in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Referred for Heart Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a clinically recognized syndrome of decreased physiological reserve. The heightened state of vulnerability in these patients confers a greater risk of adverse outcomes after even minor stressors. Our aim was to assess the prevalence and prognostic significance of the frailty phenotype in patients referred for heart transplantation. METHODS: Consecutive patients referred or on the waiting list for heart transplantation from March 2013 underwent frailty assessment. Frailty was defined as a positive response to 3 or more of the following 5 components: weak grip strength, slowed walking speed, poor appetite, physical inactivity, and exhaustion. In addition, markers of disease severity were obtained, and all patients underwent cognitive (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and depression (Depression in Medical Illness-10) screening. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients (83 men:37 women; age, 53 ± 12 years, range, 16-73 years; left ventricular ejection fraction, 27 ± 14%) underwent frailty assessment. Thirty-nine of 120 patients (33%) were assessed as frail. Frailty was associated with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure, lower body mass index, elevated intracardiac filling pressures, lower cardiac index, anemia, hypoalbuminemia, hyperbilirubinemia, cognitive impairment, and depression (all ρ < 0.05). Frailty was independent of age, sex, heart failure duration, left ventricular ejection fraction, or renal function. Frailty was an independent predictor of increased all-cause mortality: 1 year actuarial survival was 79 ± 5% in the nonfrail group compared with only 54 ± 9% for the frail group (P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is prevalent among patients with advanced symptomatic heart failure referred for heart transplantation and is associated with increased mortality.