Frailty in the Cardiac Surgical Patient: Comparison of Frailty Tools and Associated Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Frailty measurement in cardiac surgery is poorly studied. The study purposes were to identify a simple but accurate frailty tool by comparing the simplified frailty index, Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF), to a more complex frailty index, the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS), and outcomes of frail patients to nonfrail patients. METHODS: Patients aged 65 years or older admitted for elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), valvular surgery (valve), or a combination of CABG/valve were recruited and administered the SOF and CHS indexes. Surgical outcomes were defined by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. A hand-held dynamometer assessed grip strength. Health-related quality of life was assessed by the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey. RESULTS: Patients (n = 167) were primarily male (75%), white (88%), and CABG (23%), valve (50%), or CABG/valve (25%). Frailty agreement between the CHS (frail, n = 47) and SOF (frail, n = 15) was poor (κ = 0.185). SOF frail patients had poorer health, were men (67% vs 61%), had a decreased ejection fraction (0.467 vs 0.537), an increased Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk (5.0 vs 3.5), and increased European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score (8.2 vs 5.2). All SOF frail patients reported lack of energy vs 8.7% CHS frail patients, and 80% vs 23.9% reported an unintentional weight loss of 5% or more. SOF frail patients were significantly more likely to experience prolonged ventilation (20% vs 6.5%), pneumonia (20% vs 6.5%), prolonged intensive care unit hours (158.6 vs 85.01), and readmission within 30 days (20% vs 8.7%). All frail patients reported a significantly lower physical health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The SOF tool better identified patients considered "frail." Frail patients had more adverse outcomes and poorer health-related quality of life.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire among patients following open heart surgery for valve dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) was designed to assess the impact of the adverse effects of heart failure (HF). Numerous reports suggest an additional third factor with the proposed third factor representing a social dimension. The purpose of this study was to use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to validate the factor structure of the MLWHFQ, and examine a proposed third factor structure. METHODS: Participants were 1290 individuals with open heart surgery for isolated valve repair or replacement between September 2005 and May 2016. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess both initial and proposed alternate factor structures. RESULTS: CFA indicated a poor fit for the original proposed 2-factor solution [root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.116], whereas separate proposed 3-factor solutions with varying item scoring fit marginally well (RMSEA = 0.080, 0.089). The CFA suggests the existence of a third dimension, social, beyond the established original two-factor solution. Results suggest in a direct comparison of proposed social dimensions, both Garin's four item solution and Munyombwe's six-item solution provide similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest support for an additional third factor among patients undergoing isolated valve replacement surgery. We suggest given the inclusion of items important to our population, relatively strong fit indices, and correlation with the SF-12, the social dimension proposed by Munyombwe best fits our population.

The state of surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with mitral valve disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Atrial fibrillation has been shown to be associated with less favorable short and long-term outcomes in patients having mitral valve surgery. Despite the growing evidence related to the potential benefits of surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation at the time of the mitral valve operation, there is a significant variability among surgeons in their approaches to atrial fibrillation. The purpose of this review is to discuss the current state of surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation as reported in the literature, as well as to discuss the significance of atrial fibrillation and the different surgical approaches to treat patients with mitral valve disease who may also concurrently suffer from tricuspid valve disease and atrial fibrillation. RECENT FINDINGS: Increased mortality and morbidity are expected when atrial fibrillation is left untreated in patients undergoing mitral valve surgery. Modern surgical ablations resulted in a shift from the cut and sew maze procedure to the vast majority of cases being performed using different ablation technologies. The use of ablation technology simplifies the procedure. The expectation is that the vast majority of patients with atrial fibrillation will be ablated at the time of their mitral valve surgery. SUMMARY: Patients who have mitral valve with or without tricuspid valve disease with a significant history of atrial fibrillation may benefit from surgical ablation to eliminate atrial fibrillation. No increased perioperative morbidity or mortality has been documented with an improved long-term survival and very low incidence of thromboembolic events.