¿Son las escalas de valoración de fragilidad superiores a la escala de valoración ASA en la predicción de complicaciones, estancia hospitalaria y readmisiones en prótesis total de rodilla? Un estudio comparativo entre pacientes octogenarios y septuagenarios / Are frailty scores superior to the ASA score in predicting complications, hospital stay, and readmissions in total knee replacement? A comparative study between octogenarian and septuagenarian patients

Antecedentes y objetivo: Las escalas de valoración de fragilidad no han sido estandarizadas para la evaluación prequirúrgica de pacientes sometidos a un reemplazo total de rodilla (RTR). El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia de la escala de valoración de la Sociedad Americana de Anestesiología (ASA), el índice de comorbilidad de Charlson (ICC) y la escala simple de fragilidad (SSF) en la predicción de complicaciones, estancia hospitalaria, reingresos y mortalidad después del RTR electivo. Materiales y métodos: Estudiamos retrospectivamente a 448 pacientes que se sometieron a un RTR por artrosis en nuestra institución entre 2016 y 2019. Estos se dividieron en 2 grupos: grupo A (263 pacientes <80 años) y grupo B (185 pacientes >80 años). Todos fueron clasificados por escalas ASA, ICC y SSF. Resultados: El ICC fue mayor en el grupo B (mediana: 5 [RI: 4-6] vs. 4 [RI: 3-5]; p<0,001); sin embargo, no se asoció con un mayor número de complicaciones. Al realizar un análisis de regresión logística encontramos, para las complicaciones: OR SSF=0,67; ICC=1,11; ASA 3 y 4=0,89 y edad=1,04; mientras que para los reingresos: OR SSF=2,09; ICC=1,01; ASA 3 y 4=0,79 y edad=1. Conclusiones: Las escalas ICC y SSF demostraron no presentar diferencias a la escala ASA en la predicción de reingresos, complicaciones y estancia hospitalaria. Sin embargo, el SSF parece tener una mejor correlación en la predicción de la readmisión no planificada.(AU)

Background and objective: Frailty scores have not been standardized for the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, the Charlson comorbidity index (ICC) and the simple frailty score (SSF) in predicting complications, hospital stay, readmissions and mortality after elective TKR. Materials and methods: We retrospectively studied 448 patients who underwent TKR for osteoarthritis at our institution between 2016 and 2019. They were divided into two groups: Group A (263 patients, <80 years) and Group B (185 patients, >80 years).). All were classified by ASA, ICC and SSF scores. Results: The ICC was higher in Group B (median 5 [RI: 4-6] vs. 4 [RI: 3-5]; P<.001); however, it was not associated with a higher number of complications. When performing a logistic regression analysis we found, for complications: OR SSF=0.67, ICC=1.11; ASA 3 & 4=0.89 and age=1.04; while for readmissions: OR SSF=2.09; ICC=1.01; ASA 3 & 4=0.79 and age=1. Conclusions: The ICC and SSF scales showed no differences to the ASA scale in the prediction of readmissions, complications and hospital stay. However, the SSF seems to have a better correlation in predicting unplanned readmission.(AU)

[Translated article] Are frailty scores superior to the ASA score in predicting complications, hospital stay, and readmissions in total knee replacement? A comparative study between octogenarian and septuagenarian patients / ¿Son las escalas de valoración de fragilidad superiores a la escala de valoración ASA en la predicción de complicaciones, estancia hospitalaria y readmisiones en prótesis total de rodilla? Un estudio comparativo entre pacientes octogenarios y septuagenarios

Antecedentes y objetivo: Las escalas de valoración de fragilidad no han sido estandarizadas para la evaluación prequirúrgica de pacientes sometidos a un reemplazo total de rodilla (RTR). El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia de la escala de valoración de la Sociedad Americana de Anestesiología (ASA), el índice de comorbilidad de Charlson (ICC) y la escala simple de fragilidad (SSF) en la predicción de complicaciones, estancia hospitalaria, reingresos y mortalidad después del RTR electivo. Materiales y métodos: Estudiamos retrospectivamente a 448 pacientes que se sometieron a un RTR por artrosis en nuestra institución entre 2016 y 2019. Estos se dividieron en 2 grupos: grupo A (263 pacientes <80 años) y grupo B (185 pacientes >80 años). Todos fueron clasificados por escalas ASA, ICC y SSF. Resultados: El ICC fue mayor en el grupo B (mediana: 5 [RI: 4-6] vs. 4 [RI: 3-5]; p<0,001); sin embargo, no se asoció con un mayor número de complicaciones. Al realizar un análisis de regresión logística encontramos, para las complicaciones: OR SSF=0,67; ICC=1,11; ASA 3 y 4=0,89 y edad=1,04; mientras que para los reingresos: OR SSF=2,09; ICC=1,01; ASA 3 y 4=0,79 y edad=1. Conclusiones: Las escalas ICC y SSF demostraron no presentar diferencias a la escala ASA en la predicción de reingresos, complicaciones y estancia hospitalaria. Sin embargo, el SSF parece tener una mejor correlación en la predicción de la readmisión no planificada.(AU)

Background and objective: Frailty scores have not been standardized for the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, the Charlson comorbidity index (ICC) and the simple frailty score (SSF) in predicting complications, hospital stay, readmissions and mortality after elective TKR. Materials and methods: We retrospectively studied 448 patients who underwent TKR for osteoarthritis at our institution between 2016 and 2019. They were divided into two groups: Group A (263 patients, <80 years) and Group B (185 patients, >80 years).). All were classified by ASA, ICC and SSF scores. Results: The ICC was higher in Group B (median 5 [RI: 4-6] vs. 4 [RI: 3-5]; P<.001); however, it was not associated with a higher number of complications. When performing a logistic regression analysis we found, for complications: OR SSF=0.67, ICC=1.11; ASA 3 & 4=0.89 and age=1.04; while for readmissions: OR SSF=2.09; ICC=1.01; ASA 3 & 4=0.79 and age=1. Conclusions: The ICC and SSF scales showed no differences to the ASA scale in the prediction of readmissions, complications and hospital stay. However, the SSF seems to have a better correlation in predicting unplanned readmission.(AU)

[Translated article] Are frailty scores superior to the ASA score in predicting complications, hospital stay, and readmissions in total knee replacement? A comparative study between octogenarian and septuagenarian patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Frailty scores have not been standardised for the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, the Charlson comorbidity index (ICC) and the simple frailty score (SSF) in predicting complications, hospital stay, readmissions and mortality after elective TKR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 448 patients who underwent TKR for osteoarthritis at our institution between 2016 and 2019. They were divided into two groups: Group A (263 patients, <80 years) and Group B (185 patients, >80 years).). All were classified by ASA, ICC and SSF scores. RESULTS: The ICC was higher in Group B (median 5 [RI: 4-6] vs. 4 [RI: 3-5]; p<.001); however, it was not associated with a higher number of complications. When performing a logistic regression analysis we found, for complications: OR SSF=0.67; ICC=1.11; ASA 3 & 4=0.89 and age=1.04; while for readmissions: OR SSF=2.09; ICC=1.01; ASA 3 & 4=0.79 and age=1. CONCLUSIONS: The ICC and SSF scales showed no differences to the ASA scale in the prediction of readmissions, complications and hospital stay. However, the SSF seems to have a better correlation in predicting unplanned readmission.

Are frailty scores superior to the ASA score in predicting complications, hospital stay, and readmissions in total knee replacement? A comparative study between octogenarian and septuagenarian patients. / ¿Son las escalas de valoración de fragilidad superiores a la escala de valoración ASA en la predicción de complicaciones, estancia hospitalaria y readmisiones en prótesis total de rodilla? Un estudio comparativo entre pacientes octogenarios y septuagenarios.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Frailty scores have not been standardized for the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, the Charlson comorbidity index (ICC) and the simple frailty score (SSF) in predicting complications, hospital stay, readmissions and mortality after elective TKR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 448 patients who underwent TKR for osteoarthritis at our institution between 2016 and 2019. They were divided into two groups: Group A (263 patients, <80 years) and Group B (185 patients, >80 years).). All were classified by ASA, ICC and SSF scores. RESULTS: The ICC was higher in Group B (median 5 [RI: 4-6] vs. 4 [RI: 3-5]; P<.001); however, it was not associated with a higher number of complications. When performing a logistic regression analysis we found, for complications: OR SSF=0.67, ICC=1.11; ASA 3 & 4=0.89 and age=1.04; while for readmissions: OR SSF=2.09; ICC=1.01; ASA 3 & 4=0.79 and age=1. CONCLUSIONS: The ICC and SSF scales showed no differences to the ASA scale in the prediction of readmissions, complications and hospital stay. However, the SSF seems to have a better correlation in predicting unplanned readmission.