Comparison of the clinical frailty score (CFS) to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) risk calculator in all patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.

Abstract

AimThere is evolving evidence that preoperative frailty predicts outcomes of older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy (EmLap). We assessed frailty scoring in an emergency surgical population that included patients of all ages and then compared this to an established perioperative prognostic score.MethodData from the prospective Emergency Laparoscopic and Laparotomy Scottish Audit (ELLSA; November 2017–October 2018) was used. All adults over 18 were included. Frailty was measured using 7‐point clinical frailty score (CFS). Outcome measures: 30‐day mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), 30‐day readmission. Areas under the receiver‐operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for CFS (1–7) and compared to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) score with Forest plots used to compare 30‐day mortality across CFS and NELA categories.ResultsA total of 2246 patients (median age 65 years [IQR 51–75]; female 51%) underwent EmLap (60% for colorectal pathology). A total of 10.6% were frail preoperatively (≥CFS 5). As CFS increased so did 30‐day mortality (2.1% CFS1 to 25.3% CFS6 and 7; ꭓ 278.2, p < 0.001) and median LOS (10 days CFS1 to 20 days CFS6 and 7; p < 0.001). Readmission rates did not differ significantly across CFS. ROC (95% CI) for mortality was 0.71 (0.65–0.77) for CFS and 0.84 (0.78–0.89) for NELA. Addition of CFS to NELA did not increase ROC value.ConclusionThis study supports the prognostic role of frailty in the emergency surgical setting, finding increasing frailty to be associated with increased mortality and longer LOS in adults of all ages. Although NELA performed better, CFS remained predictive and has the advantage of being calculated preoperatively to aid decision‐making and treatment planning.