Handgrip strength predicts length of hospital stay in an abdominal surgical setting: the role of frailty beyond age.

BACKGROUND: Chronological age per se cannot be considered a prognostic risk factor for outcomes after elective surgery, whereas frailty could be. A simple and easy-to-get marker for frailty, such as handgrip strength (HGS), may support the surgeon in decision for an adequate healthcare plan. AIMS: The aims of this study were to: (1) determine the prevalence of frailty in an abdominal surgery setting independent of age; (2) evaluate the predictive validity of HGS for the length of hospital stay (LOS). METHODS: This is a retrospective study conducted in subjects who underwent abdominal surgical procedures. Only subjects with complete cognitive, functional, nutritional assessments and available measurement of HGS at admission were included. A final cohort of 108 patients were enrolled in the study. RESULTS: Subjects had a mean age of 67.8 ± 15.8 years (age range 19-93 years old) and were mostly men. According to Fried's criteria, 17 (15.7%, 4F/13 M) were fit, 58 (23.7%; 24F/34 M) were pre-frail and 33 (30.6%; 20F/13 M) were frail. As expected, HGS significantly differed between groups having frail lower values as compared with pre-frail and fit persons (fit: 32.99 ± 10.34 kg; pre-frail: 27.49 ± 10.35 kg; frail: 15.96 ± 9.52 kg, p < 0.0001). A final regression analysis showed that HGS was significantly and inversely associated with LOS (p = 0.020) independent of multiple covariates, including age. DISCUSSION: Most of the population undergoing abdominal surgery is pre-frail or frail. The measurement of handgrip strength is simple and inexpensive, and provides prognostic information for surgical outcomes. Muscle strength, as measured by handgrip dynamometry, is a strong predictor of LOS in a surgical setting.

Emergency Resection for Colonic Cancer Has an Independent and Unfavorable Effect on Long-Term Oncologic Outcome.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes in patients undergoing emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain controversial. This study aims to assess short- and long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective CRC surgery. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing emergency or elective colonic resections for CRC from January 2013 to December 2017 were included. Primary outcome was long-term survival. As secondary outcomes, we sought to analyze potential differences on postoperative morbidity and concerning the oncological standard of surgical resection. The Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare survival between the groups. RESULTS: Overall, 225 CRC patients were included. Of these 192 (85.3%) had an elective and 33 (14.7%) an emergency operation. Emergency indications were due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Patients in the emergency group had higher ASA score (p = 0.023), higher Charlsson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.012), and were older than those in the elective group, with median age 70 (IQR 63-79) years and 78 (IQR 68-83) years, for elective and emergency, respectively (p = 0.020). No other preoperative differences were observed. Patients in the emergency group experienced significantly more major complications (12.1% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.037), more anastomotic leakage (12.1% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001), need for reoperation (12.1% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.021), and postoperative mortality (2 patients vs. 0, p < 0.001). No differences in terms of final pathological stage, nor in accuracy of lymphadenectomy were observed. Overall survival was significantly worse in case of emergency operation, with estimated median 41 months vs. not reached in elective cases (p < 0.001). At the multivariate analysis, emergency operation was confirmed as independent unfavorable determinant of survival (with hazard rate HR = 1.97, p = 0.028), together with age (HR = 1.05, p < 0.001), postoperative major morbidity (HR = 3.18, p = 0.012), advanced stage (HR = 5.85, p < 0.001), and need for transfusion (HR = 2.10, p = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Postoperative morbidity and mortality were increased in emergency versus elective CRC resections. Despite no significant differences in terms of accuracy of resection and pathological stages, overall survival was significantly worse in patients who underwent emergency procedure, and independent of other determinants of survival.