Comparison of feasibility and results of frailty assessment methods prior to left ventricular assist device implantation

Aims Assessing frailty and sarcopenia is considered a valuable cornerstone of perioperative risk stratification in advanced heart failure patients. The lack of an international consensus on a diagnostic standard impedes its implementation in the clinical routine. This study aimed to compare the feasibility and prognostic impact of different assessment tools in patients undergoing continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (cf-LVAD) implantation. Methods and results: We prospectively compared feasibility and prognostic values of six frailty/sarcopenia assessment methods in 94 patients prior to cf-LVAD implantation: bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), computed tomography (CT)-based measurement of two muscle areas/body surface area [erector spinae muscle (TMESA/BSA) and iliopsoas muscle (TPA/BSA)], physical performance tests [grip strength, 6 min walk test (6MWT)] and Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale (RCFS). Six-month mortality and/or prolonged ventilation time >95 h was defined as the primary endpoint. BIA and CT showed full feasibility (100%); physical performance and RCFS was limited due to patients' clinical status (feasibility: 87% grip strength, 62% 6MWT, 88% RCFS). Phase angle derived by BIA showed the best results regarding the prognostic value for 6 month mortality and/or prolonged ventilation time >95 h (odds ratio (OR) 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.92], P = 0.019; area under the curve (AUC) 0.65). It provided incremental value to the clinical risk assessment of EuroSCORE II: C-index of the combined model was 0.75 [95% CI; 0.651-0.848] compared with C-index of EuroSCORE II alone, which was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.633-0.835). Six-month survival was decreased in patients with reduced body cell mass derived by BIA or reduced muscle area in the CT scan compared with patients with normal values: body cell mass 65% (95% CI: 51.8-81.6%) vs. 83% (95% CI: 74.0-93.9%); P = 0.03, TMESA/BSA 65% (95% CI: 51.2-82.2%) vs. 82% (95% CI: 73.2-93.0%); P = 0.032 and TPA/BSA 66% (95% CI: 53.7-81.0%) vs. 85% (95% CI: 75.0-95.8%); P = 0.035. Conclusions Bioelectrical impedance analysis parameters and CT measurements were shown to be suitable to predict 6-month mortality and/or prolonged ventilation time >95 h in patients with advanced heart failure prior to cf-LVAD implantation. Phase angle had the best predictive capacity and sarcopenia diagnosed by reduced body cell mass in BIA or muscle area in CT was associated with a decreased 6 month survival.

Automated summary

This study compared the feasibility and prognostic impact of different assessment tools in patients undergoing continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (cf-LVAD) implantation. The study found that bioelectrical impedance analysis parameters and CT measurements were suitable to predict 6-month mortality and/or prolonged ventilation time >95 h in patients with advanced heart failure.