Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35579719›Full record

Observational studyJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023

Frailty assessment tools predict perioperative outcome in elderly patients with endometrial cancer better than age or BMI alone: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Katharina Anic, Friedrich Flohr, Mona Wanda Schmidt, Slavomir Krajnak, Roxana Schwab, Marcus Schmidt, Christiane Westphalen, Clemens Eichelsbacher, Christian Ruckes, Walburgis Brenner and 2 more

Open access · hybridFull text readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katharina AnicDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany. katharina.anic@unimedizin-mainz.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3001-5452
Friedrich FlohrDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Mona Wanda SchmidtDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Slavomir KrajnakDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Roxana SchwabDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Marcus SchmidtDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Christiane WestphalenDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Clemens EichelsbacherDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Christian RuckesInterdisciplinary Center Clinical Trials, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Walburgis BrennerManagement of the Scientific Laboratories, University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Annette HasenburgDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Marco Johannes BattistaDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFive commonly used global health assessment tools have been evaluated to identify and assess the preoperative frailty status and its relationship with perioperative in-hospital complications and transfusion rates in older women with endometrial cancer (EC).

methodsPreoperative frailty status was examined by the G8 questionnaire, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, the Charlson Comorbidity Index and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status System, as well as the Lee-Schonberg prognostic index. The main outcome measures were perioperative laboratory values, intraoperative surgical parameters and immediately postoperative complications.

results153 consecutive women ≥ 60 years with all stages of EC, who received primary elective surgery at the University Medical Center Mainz between 2008 and 2019 were classified with selected global health assessment tools according to their preoperative performance status. In contrast to conventional prognostic parameters like older age and higher BMI, increasing frailty was significantly associated with preoperative anemia and perioperative transfusions (p < 0.05). Moreover, in patients preoperatively classified as frail significantly more postoperative complications (G8 Score: frail: 20.7% vs. non-frail: 6.7%, p = 0.028; ECOG: frail: 40.9% vs. non-frail: 2.8%, p = 0.002; and CCI: frail: 25.0% vs. non-frail: 7.4%, p = 0.003) and an increased length of hospitalization were recorded. According to propensity score matching, the risk for developing postoperative complications for frail patients was approximately two-fold higher, depending on which global health assessment tool was used.

conclusionsPreoperatively assessed frailty significantly predicts post-surgical morbidity rates in contrast to conventionally used single prognostic parameters such as age or BMI. A standardized preoperative assessment of frailty in the routine work-up might be beneficial in older cancer patients before major surgery to include these patients in a prehabilitation program with nutrition counseling and physiotherapy to adequately assess the perioperative risk.

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsFrailtyAgedBody Mass IndexFemaleFrail ElderlyGeriatric AssessmentHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsEndometrial cancerFrailtyManagementOutcomePerioperative

Identifiers

PMID35579719
PMCPMC10020300
OpenAlexW4280506909

What Socratic holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read28
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.