Background

Preoperative frailty is strongly associated with postoperative complications and mortality. However, the pathways between frailty, postoperative complications, and mortality are poorly described. The authors hypothesized that the occurrence of postoperative complications would mediate a substantial proportion of the total effect of frailty on mortality after elective noncardiac surgery.

Methods

Following protocol registration, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of intermediate- to high-risk elective noncardiac surgery patients (2016) using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. The authors conducted Bayesian mediation analysis of the relationship between preoperative frailty (exposure, using the Risk Analysis Index), serious complications (mediator), and 30-day mortality (outcome), comprehensively adjusting for confounders. The authors estimated the total effect of frailty on mortality (composed of the indirect effect mediated by complications and the remaining direct effect of frailty) and estimated the proportion of the frailty–mortality association mediated by complications.

Results

The authors identified 205,051 patients; 1,474 (0.7%) died. Complications occurred in 20,211 (9.9%). A 2 SD increase in frailty score resulted in a total association with mortality equal to an odds ratio of 3.79 (95% credible interval, 2.48 to 5.64), resulting from a direct association (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% credible interval, 1.34 to 2.30) and an indirect association mediated by complications (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% credible interval, 1.58 to 2.96). Complications mediated 57.3% (95% credible interval, 40.8 to 73.8) of the frailty–mortality association. Cardiopulmonary complications were the strongest mediators among complication subtypes.

Conclusions

Complications mediate more than half of the association between frailty and postoperative mortality in elective noncardiac surgery.

Editor’s Perspective
What We Already Know about This Topic
  • Moderate-to-severe complications are common after major surgery and can have substantial impacts on long-term outcomes

  • Preoperative frailty is strongly associated with postoperative complications and mortality

What This Article Tells Us That Is New
  • In a retrospective cohort study of intermediate- to high-risk elective noncardiac surgery patients, complications mediated over half of the association between frailty and postoperative mortality

  • Cardiopulmonary complications contributed to this association with a higher probability than renal or infectious events

Moderate to severe complications are common after major surgery (15 to 35% incidence)1,2  and can have substantial impacts on long-term outcomes. People who experience a serious complication are more likely to die and have an approximately fivefold increase in healthcare resource consumption after surgery compared to people who navigate the perioperative period complication-free.1,3 

Risk factors for postoperative complications are well studied and include demographic factors (e.g., age and sex), surgical factors (procedure, approach, and duration), and patient factors (acute and chronic illness).4–6  Advanced age is strongly associated with the risk of postoperative complications; however, among older people, rates of complications range substantially.7  This variation in complication risk is partly explained by the presence of frailty, a multidimensional syndrome related to the accumulation of age- and disease-related deficits.8,9  A recent systematic review found the presence of preoperative frailty to be the strongest significant risk factor for complications in older surgical patients,5  and multiple reviews demonstrate that frailty is associated with at least a twofold increase in postoperative mortality.8,10,11  Initial evidence suggests a potential pathway between frailty, complications, and mortality whereby older people with higher levels of frailty are more likely to experience a complication after surgery and are more likely to die as a result of their complication (a phenomenon referred to as “failure to rescue”).12,13 

A complication-mediated pathway (i.e., failure to rescue) would represent an indirect pathway from frailty to postoperative mortality (fig. 1). Previous studies demonstrate that medical and surgical complications underlie approximately two thirds of in-hospital deaths after surgery, meaning that one in three deaths occur in a non–complication-mediated manner. For people with frailty, who are at greater risk of mortality regardless of having surgery, direct (i.e., non–complication-mediated) pathways may also be of greater relevance, because chronic conditions, such as dementia and cancer, are more common as causes of death when frailty is present.14  The presence of frailty is associated with increased utilization of palliative care services, further highlighting the possibility of unique pathways to mortality in people with higher degrees of frailty. Furthermore, given the physiologic vulnerability inherent in having frailty, it is also possible that the stress of surgery itself could result in postoperative death for people with frailty without necessarily causing a clinically significant end organ complication.

Fig. 1.

Proposed pathways between preoperative frailty and postoperative mortality, mediated by complications. Also included are descriptors of the key aspects of mediation, including the total effect of frailty on mortality, which is composed of the indirect effect mediated by complications and the direct effect attributable to frailty independent of the mediation pathway.

Fig. 1.

Proposed pathways between preoperative frailty and postoperative mortality, mediated by complications. Also included are descriptors of the key aspects of mediation, including the total effect of frailty on mortality, which is composed of the indirect effect mediated by complications and the direct effect attributable to frailty independent of the mediation pathway.

Understanding the degree to which complications may mediate the association between frailty and postoperative mortality could inform development of interventions and processes of care that are urgently needed to improve outcomes for surgical patients with frailty. If complications mediate a substantial proportion of the effect of frailty on postoperative mortality, then prevention and treatment of complications would emerge as a clear priority for clinicians and researchers. In contrast, if complications do not mediate a substantial proportion of mortality risk, then other strategies to improve outcomes would be required. Therefore, we undertook a retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected surgical registry data to perform mediation analysis to estimate the degree to which complications mediate the association between frailty and postoperative mortality in noncardiac surgery. We hypothesized that the occurrence of postoperative complications would mediate a substantial proportion of the total effect of frailty on mortality after elective noncardiac surgery.

Materials and Methods

Design and Data Source

We used prospectively collected data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) participant use file to conduct a retrospective cohort study. Trained surgical clinical reviewers at each participating hospital collect NSQIP data using standardized definitions and techniques, supported by local and central quality checks to ensure data integrity.15  Ethical approval was granted (Ottawa Health Sciences Network Research Ethics Board [Ottawa, Canada] approval No. 20160439-01H). A protocol was prespecified and registered at the Center for Open Science (https://osf.io/suq6r/; accessed January 20, 2021), informed by methodologic guidelines for mediation and Bayesian analysis.16,17  Reporting followed the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement18  and the Reporting Of Bayes Used in clinical STudies (ROBUST) criteria.19 

Cohorts

We studied adults having elective intermediate- to high-risk noncardiac surgery in 2016, using a cohort definition validated by Liu et al.20  We then performed an “internal–external” validation to explore whether results were consistent in a bowel surgery cohort of mixed urgency; this cohort was identified because it was less procedurally diverse and temporally separated (2010 to 2015) from the initial cohort.21  Both cohorts were defined using relevant current procedural terminology codes (Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S1, http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537).

Exposure

We identified preoperative frailty in each participant using the Risk Analysis Index–Administrative, a multidimensional frailty score that is patterned after the Minimum Data Set Mortality Risk Index–Revised, calculated using the methods described and validated by Hall et al.22  Although several approaches to frailty assessment have been described in NSQIP data, the Risk Analysis Index–Administrative is the only instrument consistent with a multidimensional assessment of frailty and has recently been shown to have higher predictive validity than the NSQIP five-item frailty index, as well as added predictive value beyond the variables already included in the NSQIP Universal Risk Calculator.23  The Risk Analysis Index–Administrative is a continuous variable with a range from 0 to 81, with higher scores indicating greater frailty. The Risk Analysis Index–Administrative score is based on a standard scoring system (Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S2, http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537) that encompasses age, sex, cancer, weight loss, renal failure, heart failure, poor appetite, dyspnea, living status, and functional independence.

Mediators

Our proposed mediator was the occurrence of a serious complication (based on the definition used by the NSQIP Risk Calculator24 ). Any individual who experienced one or more of the following within 30 days was assigned a serious complication as a binary variable: cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, pneumonia, progressive renal insufficiency, acute renal failure, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, return to the operating room, deep incisional surgical site infection, organ space surgical site infection, systemic sepsis, unplanned intubation, urinary tract infection, and wound disruption. As described in Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S3 (http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537; including NSQIP-specific definitions for each complication), complications are identified by trained reviewers using standardized definitions.

Untangling the role of different complication subtypes is challenging, because individuals could experience multiple complications and subtypes. Therefore, we created groups of complication subtypes: cardiopulmonary (cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, unplanned intubation), infectious (pneumonia, deep incisional surgical site infection, organ space surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, systemic sepsis), or renal (progressive renal insufficiency, acute renal failure) to assess the extent that these groupings acted as mediators. These subtypes were coded in two ways: (1) any occurrence of a subtype complication, whereby an individual who experienced more than one type of complication would be included in each subtype, and (2) isolated occurrence of a complication subtype, whereby anyone experiencing more than one complication was excluded, leaving no cooccurrence between subtypes (i.e., only individuals who experienced a single complication of a single subtype were coded and analyzed, with pneumonia residing only in the cardiopulmonary subtype).

Outcome

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days of the index surgery.

Statistical Analyses

All analyses were performed using the R statistical language (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). We used the brms package to create mediation models25  and the mediation function in the sjstats package to calculate direct and indirect effects. Cohort characteristics were evaluated in people with and without a frailty score greater than 15 using absolute standardized differences.22,26 

Our overall analytic approach involved use of Bayesian modeling, because this allowed us to calculate appropriate credible intervals to gauge uncertainty around our estimates using Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations. A credible interval can be interpreted as the range within which there is a 95% probability of finding the true value given the data analyzed and previous knowledge.27  We used highest density intervals (where all points in the interval have higher probability density than points outside the interval but can be asymmetric around the median), as opposed to equal tailed intervals (which are symmetric, based on the 2.5th and 97.5th percentile, but can contain lower probability densities inside than outside of the interval). As we lacked in-depth previous knowledge of anticipated mediation effects, we used weakly informative priors (Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S4, http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537), as recommended, which decreases the likelihood of estimating unrealistically large or small effects, without having a substantive effect on regression parameters.28  The specific distribution used for fixed effects was a Student t distribution with 3 degrees of freedom, mean of 0, and scale of 2.5, which has been shown to outperform weakly informative priors based on the normal distribution because the thicker tails of the t distribution allow for occasional estimation of larger coefficients.28  Default priors in brms were used for random intercepts, which were also weakly informative, based on a half Student t distribution with 3 degrees of freedom and a scale parameter that derived from the SD of the response after applying the logit link function. We also tested the potential impact of previous distribution choice by subsequently using a normal prior for frailty (both predicting complications and mortality) based on the normal distribution with a mean of 0.405 (equal to an odds ratio or 1.5, a conservative but typical effect size for frailty in perioperative studies).8  We used default settings for brms (1,000 warmup and 2,000 sampling iterations) and increased iterations as required if chains did not adequately converge. Adequate mixing of chains and autocorrelation were evaluated using visual plots, effective sample size estimates (i.e., an estimation of the amount of independent information contained within the Markov chains,29  for which larger values are better and values greater than 1,000 are typically considered sufficient25 ), and Geweke diagnostics for chain convergence.

Mediation analyses require strong control for confounders17 ; therefore, our primary approach was to build models that included the Risk Analysis Index–Administrative plus adjustment for all variables in the NSQIP Risk Calculator (parameterizations are listed in Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S5, http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537) adjusting for each procedure using a random intercept. All variables were standardized to have a mean of 0 and a SD of 0.5, allowing priors to be appropriately scaled for all covariates. This meant that effect sizes for the continuous frailty score represented a change in 12 points (e.g., from 0 to 12, which is similar to the typical cutpoint of 15 for the Risk Analysis Index–Administrative22 ).

To conduct a mediation analysis, two regression models must be created in a multivariate framework (i.e., with more than one dependent variable)17 ; in our case, both were logistic models because our outcome and mediator were dichotomous. The first regression model had the outcome (mortality) as the dependent variable; the primary exposure (frailty), mediator (complications), and covariates (NSQIP Risk Calculator variables) were predictors. The second model had the mediator as the dependent variable with the exposure and covariates as predictors. From these models, we calculated the direct effect of frailty on mortality (odds ratio for frailty from the model predicting mortality, because this odds ratio is also adjusted for the mediator effect), the indirect effect (which is the product of regression coefficient associating frailty with complications from the second model and regression coefficient associating complications with mortality from the first model), and the total effect (which is the sum of the direct and indirect effects) of frailty on mortality. The proportion of the effect mediated by complications was then calculated as the indirect effect divided by the total effect, which was estimated using the median of the posterior distribution accompanied by a 95% credible interval that reflected the highest density interval across posterior distributions.

Sensitivity Analyses

We reran our primary analysis in an internal–external validation cohort of mixed urgency bowel surgery (2010 to 2015) to test the generalizability of our findings. Next, we focused on evaluating the mediation pathway in greater detail by estimating the impact of different complication subtypes. The first approach used a broad definition of subtypes; we ran three versions of the primary mediation model, and each complication subtype defined using any occurrence (i.e., allowing multiple occurrences and possible overlap) was entered sequentially as the mediator variable. Comparison of the strength of evidence that one complication type was more likely to mediate the frailty–mortality association was quantified using Bayes factors (guide to interpreting strength of evidence using Bayes factors in Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S6, http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537).30  Many patients may experience multiple complications and complication types, which could obscure the specific subtype mediation pathway. Therefore, we conducted a second approach using isolated complication subtypes. People who experienced more than one serious complication were excluded, which allowed us to more accurately define the role of each subtype in a single multivariate model (i.e., a single regression framework that allowed posterior distributions to be directly compared across complication subtype mediators). This model included each isolated complication subtype as a dependent variable (each adjusted separately for confounders), as well as the mortality model with each subtype as a predictor, allowing estimation of the joint effects of each subtype. Of note, where the mediation analyses considered multiple mediators, the sum of mediation proportion point estimates (in our case, the median of the posterior distribution) could exceed 1; therefore, relative effect sizes should be considered instead of absolute values.31,32  Following peer review recommendations, we further explored whether mediation may differ by case mix by rerunning our primary analysis limited to general surgery cases in our elective high-risk cohort only.

Sample Size and Missing Data

Samples sizes were based on all available cases in the NSQIP participant use file meeting inclusion criteria for our two cohorts. No variables had missing values, but some were listed as unknown: functional status (n = 823 [0.4%], where these values were collapsed with the independent category); American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA; Schaumburg, Illinois) score (n = 330 [0.2%], where these values were collapsed with the ASA II category); and transfer status (n = 103 [less than 0.1%], where these values were collapsed with the not transferred category).

Results

We identified 205,051 patients having elective intermediate- to high-risk noncardiac surgery. The mean ± SD Risk Analysis Index–Administrative score was 6 ± 5. Cohort demographics separated by Risk Analysis Index–Administrative score cutoff of 15 are presented in table 1; most characteristics differed by Risk Analysis Index–Administrative score, with higher score patients being older, more functionally dependent, and more likely to have acute and chronic medical conditions.

Table 1.

Demographics Grouped by High and Low Frailty Scores

Demographics Grouped by High and Low Frailty Scores
Demographics Grouped by High and Low Frailty Scores

Outcome Rates

Within 30 days of surgery, 1,474 (0.7%) people died, and 20,211 individuals (9.9%) experienced a serious complication. Of those who died, 1,028 (69.7%) suffered a complication before dying. Among those who experienced a complication, 13,481 (66.7%) had a single serious complication. Complication subtypes included 6,927 (3.4%) cardiopulmonary, 10,654 (5.2%) infectious, and 1,272 (0.6%) renal events. Overlaps of complication subtypes are reported in Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S7 (http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537).

Mediation

All models converged, had adequate effective sample size, and did not suffer from substantive autocorrelation (model diagnostics and a model summary are provided in Supplemental Digital Content 1, table S8, http://links.lww.com/ALN/C537). The general surgery sensitivity analysis required 5,000 sampling iterations to achieve adequate effective sample size. Figure 2 provides the posterior distributions and 95% and 50% credible intervals for the direct, indirect, and total effects of frailty on mortality. The total effect of a 12-point greater frailty score was 3.79-fold greater odds of mortality (95% credible interval, 2.48 to 5.64), which resulted from a direct effect attributable to frailty (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% credible interval, 1.34 to 2.30) and an indirect effect mediated by complications (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% credible interval, 1.58 to 2.96). This resulted in a proportion of the effect of frailty on mortality mediated by complications of 57.3% (95% credible interval, 40.8 to 73.8). The estimated probabilities that the mediation effect was greater than 0% (i.e., a nonnull mediation effect), 10%, 33%, and 50% are provided in table 2.

Table 2.

Probability of Different Proportion of the Frailty–Mortality Association Mediated by Complications

Probability of Different Proportion of the Frailty–Mortality Association Mediated by Complications
Probability of Different Proportion of the Frailty–Mortality Association Mediated by Complications
Fig. 2.

Total, direct, and indirect effects of frailty on mortality, expressed as odds ratios. Included are posterior distributions for each parameter, along with a dot (representing the median value), a thick bar (50% credible interval), and thin bar (95% credible interval). Credible intervals were based on the highest density interval of the posterior distribution.

Fig. 2.

Total, direct, and indirect effects of frailty on mortality, expressed as odds ratios. Included are posterior distributions for each parameter, along with a dot (representing the median value), a thick bar (50% credible interval), and thin bar (95% credible interval). Credible intervals were based on the highest density interval of the posterior distribution.

When using an informative, normal previous distribution, the total effect of a 12-point greater frailty score was 3.74-fold greater odds of mortality (95% credible interval, 2.43 to 5.45), which resulted from a direct effect attributable to frailty (odds ratio 1.73, 95% credible interval, 1.31 to 2.29) and an indirect effect mediated by complications (odds ratio 2.14, 95% credible interval, 1.58 to 2.92). This resulted in a proportion of the effect of frailty on mortality mediated by complications of 58.0% (95% credible interval, 41.1 to 73.9).

Internal–External Validation

Among people having bowel surgery from 2010 to 2015, the total, direct, and indirect effects of frailty were attenuated compared to the mixed noncardiac cohort (total frailty–mortality odds ratio, 1.84; 95% credible interval, 1.60 to 2.12; direct odds ratio, 1.61; 95% credible interval, 1.44 to 1.82; indirect odds ratio, 1.14; 95% credible interval, 1.06 to 1.23), as was the proportion mediated (21.2%; 95% credible interval, 10.5 to 31.9). The estimated probabilities that the mediation effect was greater than 0%, 10%, 33%, and 50% are provided in table 2.

A sensitivity analysis limited to general surgery cases was similar to the primary findings (total frailty–mortality odds ratio, 3.19; 95% credible interval, 2.03 to 5.10; direct odds ratio, 1.73; 95% credible interval, 1.26 to 2.34; indirect odds ratio, 1.84; 95% credible interval, 1.31 to 2.56; proportion mediated, 52.8%; 95% credible interval, 31.5 to 73.7).

Sensitivity Analyses by Complication Type

The probability of nonzero mediation, and related Bayes factors, by subtype, are reported in table 3. Posterior distributions and credible intervals estimating the proportion of the frailty–mortality association mediated by isolated complication subtype are provided in figure 3. The median estimates of the proportion of the frailty–mortality association mediated by renal and cardiopulmonary complications were similar (71.2% vs. 64.5%); however, only the 95% credible interval for cardiopulmonary complications excluded the null value (i.e., 0). There was minimal evidence that infectious complications mediated a substantial proportion of the frailty–mortality association.

Table 3.

Posterior Probabilities and Bayes Factors for Nonzero Mediation Effects by Complication Subtype

Posterior Probabilities and Bayes Factors for Nonzero Mediation Effects by Complication Subtype
Posterior Probabilities and Bayes Factors for Nonzero Mediation Effects by Complication Subtype
Fig. 3.

Proportion of the effect of frailty on mortality mediated by different complication subtype definitions. Included are posterior distributions for each parameter, along with a dot (representing the median value), a thick bar (50% credible interval), and thin bar (95% credible interval). Credible intervals were based on the highest density interval of the posterior distribution. Because multiple mediators were included in this analysis, the values should be interpreted as relative strengths, not absolute values (as medians can, and do, sum to greater than 1). The dashed vertical line is the null value; therefore, credible intervals overlapping this line are less than 95% probable to mediate an effect.

Fig. 3.

Proportion of the effect of frailty on mortality mediated by different complication subtype definitions. Included are posterior distributions for each parameter, along with a dot (representing the median value), a thick bar (50% credible interval), and thin bar (95% credible interval). Credible intervals were based on the highest density interval of the posterior distribution. Because multiple mediators were included in this analysis, the values should be interpreted as relative strengths, not absolute values (as medians can, and do, sum to greater than 1). The dashed vertical line is the null value; therefore, credible intervals overlapping this line are less than 95% probable to mediate an effect.

Discussion

In a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected surgical registry data, we estimate that complications may mediate over half of the association between frailty and postoperative mortality in elective noncardiac surgery patients. Cardiopulmonary complications may contribute to this association with a higher probability than renal or infectious events. The extent of mediation may vary by surgery type and urgency, as a smaller proportion of the frailty–mortality association was mediated by complications in a mixed urgency bowel surgery cohort. Therefore, as new frailty-focused interventions are developed, clinicians and researchers should consider strategies to reduce complication rates and treat their occurrence, while also considering the needs of the 40% of frailty-related deaths that may occur via pathways not associated with complications.

Numerous systematic reviews report strong and consistent associations between higher levels of preoperative frailty and higher postoperative mortality rates, findings that are apparent across surgical specialities and different approaches to frailty assessment.8,10,11  Similarly, systematic reviews document substantially higher rates of postoperative complications when frailty is present before surgery.5  However, limited data exist that explore pathways between frailty, complications, and postoperative mortality, a knowledge gap that may contribute to the continued shortage of evidence-based interventions to improve outcomes for surgical patients with frailty.33 

Previous studies have investigated the association of frailty with failure to rescue, and document that frailty is associated with a 2.5- to 5-fold greater odds of dying after experiencing a postoperative complication in high-risk, emergency, and trauma surgery.12,34,35  Frailty is also associated with failure to rescue in a dose–response fashion,12  further supporting a possible relationship. However, these findings address only a single component of the proposed pathway between frailty and mortality. Our findings build on these results by considering both the direct effect of frailty on mortality and the indirect effect of complications that we hypothesized may mediate a substantial proportion of the observed frailty–mortality association. This allowed us to document not only what happened after a complication, conditional on frailty status, but also the extent to which the adverse association between frailty and mortality may have operated via a complication-dependent pathway. In doing so, we found that over half of the association of frailty with postoperative mortality appears to be mediated by the occurrence of postoperative complications, even controlling for other possible sources of confounding. Based on our data, the likelihood of this relationship being nonnull was very high (greater than 99% probability that over 33% of the observed total effect was complication-mediated, and 83% probability that over 50% of the total effect was mediated by complications). However, this also suggests that a substantial proportion of frailty-associated postoperative mortality may be related to non–complication-mediated mechanisms, which is higher than previous estimates in non–frailty-focused studies.36 

Our finding that the frailty–mortality association was substantially mediated by complications, in particular cardiopulmonary complications, is consistent with the existing perioperative frailty literature. First, people with frailty are inherently vulnerable to stressors.37,38  Surgery results in substantial physical and physiologic stress,39  stress that can directly lead to end-organ damage in individuals with limited preoperative reserve.40  Previous studies report that people with frailty die at a much higher rate immediately after elective and emergency surgery than people without frailty,41,42  and that inadequate cardiovascular reserve during surgery may mediate up to 10% of the association between frailty and postoperative mortality.43  Furthermore, among people who experience a postoperative cardiovascular complication, frailty characteristics (advanced age, higher comorbidity burden, and higher ASA score) are the strongest predictors of subsequent mortality.44  Together, these data suggest the need for strategies to be developed that improve physiologic (especially cardiopulmonary) reserve before surgery (such as prehabilitation), while also addressing the need to identify complications in a timely manner when they occur (e.g., increased use of monitored postoperative care area, virtual high-dependency monitoring, or close follow-up by rapid response teams). Although supported by face validity, prospective evaluation is required to generate evidence-based recommendations.

For the approximately 40% of the frailty–mortality association that does not appear to be complication-mediated, future research is also required. As people with frailty are at greater risk of death at any time (i.e., regardless of having surgery), preoperative care planning and understanding individuals’ preferences and goals of care are especially important for patients with frailty. Preoperative frailty assessment should trigger more careful consideration of patient selection, as surgery is a substantial stressor and people with frailty are typically physiologically vulnerable. Preemptive consideration of palliative care could also be considered, although evidence for palliative care in surgical patients is sparse and suffers from multiple methodologic flaws.45  However, available evidence is generally positive, with studies reporting an association between frailty assessment–triggered palliative care consultations and decreased mortality,46  improved communication and decision-making, and symptom management.45  Other areas of focus could include support for transitions out of hospital, which have been identified as an area of focus for medically complex patients like those with frailty.47,48 

Strengths and Limitations

Our findings must be appraised in keeping with this study’s strengths and limitations. First, we prespecified our approaches in a registered protocol and evaluated the generalizability of our findings using temporally and procedurally separated cohorts. Use of NSQIP data allowed us to utilize complication variables that are typically considered the reference standard in surgical data49 ; however, some definitions in NSQIP (e.g., postoperative myocardial infarction) are likely inadequately sensitive to capture all occurrences as many hospitals do not conduct serial troponin testing in all patients. This may also mean that those identified have more severe presentations, which could bias our results from the null. Furthermore, our methods could not fully disentangle the role of overlapping complication types as mediators, although this warrants future research in people with frailty. Use of Bayesian analyses allowed us to quantify the probability that our findings were true, conditional on our data and previous knowledge, an approach that is more intuitive and less prone to issues of multiplicity than more often used frequentist analyses. However, how our data generalize to non-NSQIP hospitals is unknown. Mediation analyses also require strong control for confounding; while we used best practices to control for a robust set of known confounders, there is no guarantee that unmeasured confounders were not present that could attenuate the magnitude of our findings, which must only be interpreted as associations. Furthermore, as some variables contributed to both the Risk Analysis Index–Administrative score and were included in our models as covariates, adjustment for both could have decreased precision in our estimates. We used a linear parameterization of frailty to avoid the assumptions inherent in categorization of a continuous variable50–52 ; however, this approach carried its own assumptions. Post hoc, we did attempt a tensor-spline parameterization of our frailty instrument; however, even after 20,000 iterations, the frailty parameter demonstrated an unacceptable level of autocorrelation and poor mixing of Markov chains, precluding our ability to use this approach for inference. Hospital-level indicators are also lacking from the NSQIP participant use file data, which precluded us from accounting for the nesting of patients in individual hospitals. Finally, the cause of death for people who did not experience a complication could not be ascertained.

Conclusions

The occurrence of postoperative complications may mediate over half of the observed association between preoperative frailty and postoperative mortality. Future research is needed to develop and evaluate interventions to reduce the incidence of complications and address their impacts in a timely manner. A more in-depth understanding of the direct pathway between frailty and mortality is also required to address non–complication-mediated mortality.

Research Support

Supported by salary support from the Ottawa Hospital Anesthesia Alternate Funds Association (Ottawa, Canada; to Dr. McIsaac and Dr. Lalu).

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

1.
Pearse
RM
,
Moreno
RP
,
Bauer
P
,
Pelosi
P
,
Metnitz
P
,
Spies
C
,
Vallet
B
,
Vincent
JL
,
Hoeft
A
,
Rhodes
A
;
European Surgical Outcomes Study (EuSOS) Group for the Trials Groups of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Society of Anaesthesiology
:
Mortality after surgery in Europe: A 7 day cohort study.
Lancet
.
2012
;
380
:
1059
65
2.
Wijeysundera
DN
,
Pearse
RM
,
Shulman
MA
,
Abbott
TEF
,
Torres
E
,
Ambosta
A
,
Croal
BL
,
Granton
JT
,
Thorpe
KE
,
Grocott
MPW
,
Farrington
C
,
Myles
PS
,
Cuthbertson
BH
;
METS Study Investigators
:
Assessment of functional capacity before major non-cardiac surgery: An international, prospective cohort study.
Lancet
.
2018
;
391
:
2631
40
3.
Vonlanthen
R
,
Slankamenac
K
,
Breitenstein
S
,
Puhan
MA
,
Muller
MK
,
Hahnloser
D
,
Hauri
D
,
Graf
R
,
Clavien
PA
:
The impact of complications on costs of major surgical procedures: A cost analysis of 1200 patients.
Ann Surg
.
2011
;
254
:
907
13
4.
Bilimoria
KY
,
Liu
Y
,
Paruch
JL
,
Zhou
L
,
Kmiecik
TE
,
Ko
CY
,
Cohen
ME
:
Development and evaluation of the universal ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator: A decision aid and informed consent tool for patients and surgeons.
J Am Coll Surg
.
2013
;
217
:
833
42.e1–3
5.
Watt
J
,
Tricco
AC
,
Talbot-Hamon
C
,
Pham
B
,
Rios
P
,
Grudniewicz
A
,
Wong
C
,
Sinclair
D
,
Straus
SE
:
Identifying older adults at risk of harm following elective surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BMC Med
.
2018
;
16
:
2
6.
Visser
A
,
Geboers
B
,
Gouma
DJ
,
Goslings
JC
,
Ubbink
DT
:
Predictors of surgical complications: A systematic review.
Surgery
.
2015
;
158
:
58
65
7.
Oresanya
LB
,
Lyons
WL
,
Finlayson
E
:
Preoperative assessment of the older patient: A narrative review.
JAMA
.
2014
;
311
:
2110
20
8.
Aucoin
SD
,
Hao
M
,
Sohi
R
,
Shaw
J
,
Bentov
I
,
Walker
D
,
McIsaac
DI
:
Accuracy and feasibility of clinically applied frailty instruments before surgery.
Anesthesiology
.
2020
;
133
:
78
95
9.
McIsaac
DI
,
MacDonald
DB
,
Aucoin
SD
:
Frailty for perioperative clinicians: A narrative review.
Anesth Analg
.
2020
;
130
:
1450
60
10.
Lin
HS
,
Watts
JN
,
Peel
NM
,
Hubbard
RE
:
Frailty and post-operative outcomes in older surgical patients: A systematic review.
BMC Geriatr
.
2016
;
16
:
157
11.
McGuckin
DG
,
Mufti
S
,
Turner
DJ
,
Bond
C
,
Moonesinghe
SR
:
The association of peri-operative scores, including frailty, with outcomes after unscheduled surgery.
Anaesthesia
.
2018
;
73
:
819
24
12.
Shah
R
,
Attwood
K
,
Arya
S
,
Hall
DE
,
Johanning
JM
,
Gabriel
E
,
Visioni
A
,
Nurkin
S
,
Kukar
M
,
Hochwald
S
,
Massarweh
NN
:
Association of frailty with failure to rescue after low-risk and high-risk inpatient surgery.
JAMA Surg
.
2018
;
153
:
e180214
13.
Arya
S
,
Kim
SI
,
Duwayri
Y
,
Brewster
LP
,
Veeraswamy
R
,
Salam
A
,
Dodson
TF
:
Frailty increases the risk of 30-day mortality, morbidity, and failure to rescue after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair independent of age and comorbidities.
J Vasc Surg
.
2015
;
61
:
324
31
14.
Lohman
MC
,
Sonnega
AJ
,
Resciniti
NV
,
Leggett
AN
:
Frailty phenotype and cause-specific mortality in the United States.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci
.
2020
;
75
:
1935
42
15.
User Guide for the ACS NSQIP Participant Use Data File
.
Chicago
,
2014
.
Available at: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/participant-use. Accessed January 20, 2021.
16.
Depaoli
S
,
van de Schoot
R
:
Improving transparency and replication in Bayesian statistics: The WAMBS-Checklist.
Psychol Methods
.
2017
;
22
:
240
61
17.
VanderWeele
TJ
:
Mediation analysis: A practitioner’s guide.
Annu Rev Public Health
.
2016
;
37
:
17
32
18.
Collins
GS
,
Reitsma
JB
,
Altman
DG
,
Moons
KG
:
Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD statement.
Ann Intern Med
.
2015
;
162
:
55
63
19.
Sung
L
,
Hayden
J
,
Greenberg
ML
,
Koren
G
,
Feldman
BM
,
Tomlinson
GA
:
Seven items were identified for inclusion when reporting a Bayesian analysis of a clinical study.
J Clin Epidemiol
.
2005
;
58
:
261
8
20.
Liu
JB
,
Liu
Y
,
Cohen
ME
,
Ko
CY
,
Sweitzer
BJ
:
Defining the intrinsic cardiac risks of operations to improve preoperative cardiac risk assessments.
Anesthesiology
.
2018
;
128
:
283
92
21.
Steyerberg
EW
,
Harrell
FE
Jr
:
Prediction models need appropriate internal, internal–external, and external validation.
J Clin Epidemiol
.
2016
;
69
:
245
7
22.
Hall
DE
,
Arya
S
,
Schmid
KK
,
Blaser
C
,
Carlson
MA
,
Bailey
TL
,
Purviance
G
,
Bockman
T
,
Lynch
TG
,
Johanning
J
:
Development and initial validation of the risk analysis index for measuring frailty in surgical populations.
JAMA Surg
.
2017
;
152
:
175
82
23.
McIsaac
DI
,
Aucoin
SD
,
van Walraven
C
:
A Bayesian comparison of frailty instruments in noncardiac surgery: A cohort study
.
Anesth Analg
.
2020
[Epub ahead of print]
24.
ACS NSQIP Universal Risk Calculator.
Available at: https://riskcalculator.facs.org/RiskCalculator/. Accessed January 20, 2021.
25.
Bürkner
P-C
:
brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using stan.
J Stat Softw
.
2017
;
80
:
1
27
26.
Austin
PC
:
Using the standardized difference to compare the prevalence of a binary variable between two groups in observational research.
Commun Stat Simul Comput
.
2009
;
38
:
1228
34
27.
Gelman
A
,
Carlin
JB
,
Stern
H
:
Bayesian Data Analysis
, 2nd edition.
Boca Raton, Florida
,
Chapman & Hall/CRC
,
2003
28.
Gelman
A
,
Jakulin
A
,
Pittau
MG
,
Su
Y-S
:
A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models.
Ann Appl Stat
.
2008
;
2
:
1360
83
29.
Kruschke
J
:
Doing Bayesian Data Analysis: A Tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan
, 2nd edition.
Cambridge, Massachusetts
,
Academic Press
,
2014
30.
Kass
RE
,
Raftery
AE
:
Bayes factors.
J Am Stat Assoc
.
1995
;
90
:
773
95
31.
Mascha
EJ
,
Dalton
JE
,
Kurz
A
,
Saager
L
:
Understanding the mechanism.
Anesth Analg
.
2013
;
117
:
980
94
32.
Daniel
RM
,
De Stavola
BL
,
Cousens
SN
,
Vansteelandt
S
:
Causal mediation analysis with multiple mediators.
Biometrics
.
2015
;
71
:
1
14
33.
McIsaac
DI
,
Jen
T
,
Mookerji
N
,
Patel
A
,
Lalu
MM
:
Interventions to improve the outcomes of frail people having surgery: A systematic review.
PLoS One
.
2017
;
12
:
e0190071
34.
Joseph
B
,
Phelan
H
,
Hassan
A
,
Orouji Jokar
T
,
O’Keeffe
T
,
Azim
A
,
Gries
L
,
Kulvatunyou
N
,
Latifi
R
,
Rhee
P
:
The impact of frailty on failure-to-rescue in geriatric trauma patients: A prospective study.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg
.
2016
;
81
:
1150
5
35.
Khan
M
,
Jehan
F
,
Zeeshan
M
,
Kulvatunyou
N
,
Fain
MJ
,
Saljuqi
AT
,
O’Keeffe
T
,
Joseph
B
:
Failure to rescue after emergency general surgery in geriatric patients: Does frailty matter?
J Surg Res
.
2019
;
233
:
397
402
36.
Scally
CP
,
Yin
H
,
Birkmeyer
JD
,
Wong
SL
:
Comparing perioperative processes of care in high and low mortality centers performing pancreatic surgery.
J Surg Oncol
.
2015
;
112
:
866
71
37.
Fried
LP
,
Ferrucci
L
,
Darer
J
,
Williamson
JD
,
Anderson
G
:
Untangling the concepts of disability, frailty, and comorbidity: Implications for improved targeting and care.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci
.
2004
;
59
:
255
63
38.
Rodríguez-Mañas
L
,
Féart
C
,
Mann
G
,
Viña
J
,
Chatterji
S
,
Chodzko-Zajko
W
,
Gonzalez-Colaço Harmand
M
,
Bergman
H
,
Carcaillon
L
,
Nicholson
C
,
Scuteri
A
,
Sinclair
A
,
Pelaez
M
,
Cammen
T Van Der
,
Beland
F
,
Bickenbach
J
,
Delamarche
P
,
Ferrucci
L
,
Fried
LP
,
Gutiérrez-Robledo
LM
,
Rockwood
K
,
Rodríguez Artalejo
F
,
Serviddio
G
,
Vega
E
:
Searching for an operational definition of frailty: A delphi method based consensus statement: The frailty operative definition-consensus conference project
.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci
.
2013
;
68
:
62
7
39.
Fleisher
LA
,
Fleischmann
KE
,
Auerbach
AD
,
Barnason
SA
,
Beckman
JA
,
Bozkurt
B
,
Davila-Roman
VG
,
Gerhard-Herman
MD
,
Holly
TA
,
Kane
GC
,
Marine
JE
,
Nelson
MT
,
Spencer
CC
,
Thompson
A
,
Ting
HH
,
Uretsky
BF
,
Wijeysundera
DN
;
American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association
:
2014 ACC/AHA guideline on perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines.
J Am Coll Cardiol
.
2014
;
64
:
e77
137
40.
Devereaux
PJ
,
Chan
MT
V
,
Alonso-Coello
P
,
Walsh
M
,
Berwanger
O
,
Villar
JC
,
Wang
CY
,
Garutti
RI
,
Jacka
MJ
,
Sigamani
A
,
Srinathan
S
,
Biccard
BM
,
Chow
CK
,
Abraham
V
,
Tiboni
M
,
Pettit
S
,
Szczeklik
W
,
Lurati Buse
G
,
Botto
F
,
Guyatt
G
,
Heels-Ansdell
D
,
Sessler
DI
,
Thorlund
K
,
Garg
AX
,
Mrkobrada
M
,
Thomas
S
,
Rodseth
RN
,
Pearse
RM
,
Thabane
L
,
McQueen
MJ
,
VanHelder
T
,
Bhandari
M
,
Bosch
J
,
Kurz
A
,
Polanczyk
C
,
Malaga
G
,
Nagele
N
,
Le Manach
Y
,
Leuwer
M
,
Yusuf
S
:
Association between postoperative troponin levels and 30-day mortality among patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.
JAMA
.
2012
;
307
:
2295
304
41.
McIsaac
DI
,
Bryson
GL
,
van Walraven
C
:
Association of frailty and 1-year postoperative mortality following major elective noncardiac surgery: A population-based cohort study.
JAMA Surg
.
2016
;
151
:
538
45
42.
McIsaac
DI
,
Moloo
H
,
Bryson
GL
,
van Walraven
C
:
The association of frailty with outcomes and resource use after emergency general surgery: A population-based cohort study.
Anesth Analg
.
2017
;
124
:
1653
61
43.
James
LA
,
Levin
MA
,
Lin
HM
,
Deiner
SG
:
Association of preoperative frailty with intraoperative hemodynamic instability and postoperative mortality.
Anesth Analg
.
2019
;
128
:
1279
85
44.
Mazzarello
S
,
McIsaac
DI
,
Beattie
WS
,
Fergusson
DA
,
Lalu
MM
:
Risk factors for failure to rescue in myocardial infarction after noncardiac surgery.
Anesthesiology
.
2020
;
133
:
96
108
45.
Lilley
EJ
,
Khan
KT
,
Johnston
FM
,
Berlin
A
,
Bader
AM
,
Mosenthal
AC
,
Cooper
Z
:
Palliative care interventions for surgical patients: A systematic review.
JAMA Surg
.
2016
;
151
:
172
83
46.
Ernst
KF
,
Hall
DE
,
Schmid
KK
,
Seever
G
,
Lavedan
P
,
Lynch
TG
,
Johanning
JM
:
Surgical palliative care consultations over time in relationship to systemwide frailty screening.
JAMA Surg
.
2014
;
149
:
1121
6
47.
Coleman
EA
,
Parry
C
,
Chalmers
S
,
Min
SJ
:
The care transitions intervention: Results of a randomized controlled trial.
Arch Intern Med
.
2006
;
166
:
1822
8
48.
Coleman
EA
,
Boult
C
;
American Geriatrics Society Health Care Systems Committee
:
Improving the quality of transitional care for persons with complex care needs.
J Am Geriatr Soc
.
2003
;
51
:
556
7
49.
McIsaac
DI
,
Hamilton
GM
,
Abdulla
K
,
Lavallée
LT
,
Moloo
H
,
Pysyk
C
,
Tufts
J
,
Ghali
WA
,
Forster
AJ
:
Validation of new ICD-10–based patient safety indicators for identification of in-hospital complications in surgical patients: A study of diagnostic accuracy.
BMJ Qual Saf
.
2020
;
29
:
209
16
50.
Royston
P
,
Altman
DG
,
Sauerbrei
W
:
Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: A bad idea.
Stat Med
.
2006
;
25
:
127
41
51.
Walraven
C van
,
Hart
RG
:
Leave ’em alone: Why continuous variables should be analyzed as such.
Neuroepidemiology
.
2008
;
30
:
138
9
52.
Bennette
C
,
Vickers
A
:
Against quantiles: Categorization of continuous variables in epidemiologic research, and its discontents.
BMC Med Res Methodol
.
2012
;
12
:
21