Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 414

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of frailty on outcomes in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Panayi, A.C., Orkaby, A.R., Sakthivel, D., Endo, Y., Varon, D., Roh, D., Orgill, D.P., Neppl, R.L., Javedan, H., Bhasin, S., Sinha, I.·2019·The American Journal of Surgery

Abstract

Importance: Age has historically been used to predict negative post-surgical outcomes. The concept of frailty was introduced to explain the discrepancies that exist between patients’ chronological and physiological age. The efficacy of the modified frailty index (mFI) to predict surgical risk is not clear. Objective: We sought to synthesize the current literature to quantify the impact of frailty as a prognostic indicator across all surgical specialties. Data Sources: Pubmed and Cochrane databases were screened from inception to 1 January 2018. Study Selection: Studies utilizing the modified Frailty Index (mFI) as a post-operative indicator of any type of surgery. The mFI was selected based on a preliminary search showing it to be the most commonly applied index in surgical cohorts. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Articles were selected via a two-stage process undertaken by two reviewers (AP and DS). Statistical analysis was performed in Revman (Review manager V5.3). The random-effects model was used to calculate the Risk Ratios (RR). Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): The primary outcomes: post-operative complications, re-admission, reoperation, discharge to a skilled care facility, and mortality. Results: This meta-analysis of 16 studies randomizes 683,487 patients, 444,885 frail, from gastrointestinal, vascular, orthopedic, urogenital, head and neck, emergency, neurological, oncological, cardiothoracic, as well as general surgery cohorts. Frail patients were more likely to experience complications (RR 1.48, 95%CI 1.35–1.61; p<0.001), major complications (RR 2.03, 95%CI 1.26–3.29; p=0.004), and wound complications (RR 1.52, 95%CI 1.47–1.57; p<0.001). Furthermore, frail patients had higher risk of readmission (RR 1.61, 95%CI 1.44–1.80; p<0.001) and discharge to skilled care (RR 2.15, 95%CI 1.92–2.40; p<0.001). Notably, the risk of mortality was 4.19 times more likely in frail patients (95% CI 2.96—5.92; p< 0.001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study is the first to synthesize the evidence across multiple surgical specialties and demonstrates that the mFI is an underappreciated prognostic indicator that strongly correlates with the risk of post-surgical morbidity and mortality. This supports that formal incorporation of pre-operative frailty assessment improves surgical decision-making.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.020

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 54 references

Cited by

See all 414

Metadata

Authors
Panayi, A. C., Orkaby, A. R., Sakthivel, D., Endo, Y., Varon, D., Roh, D., Orgill, D. P., Neppl, R. L., Javedan, H., Bhasin, S., & Sinha, I.
Venue
The American Journal of Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-08
Volume
218
Issue
2
Pages
393-400
ISSN
0002-9610 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2903027527
Cited by
414
References
54
FWCI
2.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of frailty on outcomes in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.020
The paper
Panayi, A. C., Orkaby, A. R., Sakthivel, D., Endo, Y., Varon, D., Roh, D., Orgill, D. P., Neppl, R. L., Javedan, H., Bhasin, S., & Sinha, I. (2019). Impact of frailty on outcomes in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The American Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.020

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.