Observational studyClinical transplantation2022
Benefits of both physical assessment and electronic health record review to assess frailty prior to heart transplant.
Observational study in Clinical transplantation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Center Differences in PreTransplant Functional Status and Its Association With Survival After Heart Transplantation.Clinical transplantation · 2026Article
- Clinical Application of Frailty in the Evaluation of Solid Organ Transplant Patients.Current transplantation reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Cellular Senescence and Frailty in Transplantation.Current transplantation reports · 2023Article
- Frailty and solid-organ transplant candidates: a scoping review.BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFrailty status affects outcomes after heart transplantation, but the optimal way to assess frailty prior to transplant remains unknown.
methodsThis single-center, observational study assessed 44 heart transplant candidates for frailty using three methods. The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP) were used as two physical assessments of frailty. The Frailty Risk Score (FRS) was used as a chart-review based assessment measuring 20 different biopsychosocial and functional components, including biomarkers, depression, cognitive impairment, and sleep.
resultsWe determined the correlation between FRS, SPPB, and FFP and how each correlated with clinical outcomes. Of 44 participants, mean age was 60 years. FRS correlated with SPPB and FFP (P = .043, P < .001, respectively). Higher frailty as measured by SPPB and FRS was significantly associated with lack of achieving waitlist status (P = .022; P = .002) and not being transplanted (P = .026; P = .008). Higher frailty by SPPB and FFP was also associated with mortality (P = .010; P = .025).
conclusionSPPB and chart-review FRS showed potential for predicting waitlist and transplant status of heart transplant candidates, while SPPB and FFP were associated with mortality. Additional studies may serve to validate these observations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.