Skip to main content
. 2016 Jan 27;8(1):27–40. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v8.i1.27

Table 1.

Complies all studies evaluated in patients undergoing esophageal or gastric resection

Ref. Country Quality score1 Study design Sample size Age (yr) Male sex (%) Surgery type Parameter used to define frailty Postoperative complication rate Follow-up (mo) 30-d morbidity (%) 30-d mortality (%) 1-yr OS (%) 5-yr OS (%) Outcome parameter Frailty/OS (OR)
Hodari et al[34] United States 5 R 2095 NR NR Esophagectomy Modified Canadian age index 17.8 NR NR NR 96 NR Postoperative complications OR = 31.84, P = 0.015
Sheetz et al[35] United States 7 R 230 62 88 Transhiatal esophagectomy Lean psoas area (L4 level) 57.8 12.8 NR NR 11 0 Overall survival OR = 0.456; 95%CI: 0.197-1.054; P = 0.067
Yip et al[26] United Kingdom 5 P 36 63 86 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and esophagectomy Body composition 26 30 26 0 NR NR No multivariate outcome analysis NR - significant increase in complications and decrease in survival
Awad et al[27] United Kingdom 7 P 47 63 Esophagectomy gastrectomy Body composition NR 24 NR 2.2 23.9 19 No multivariate outcome analysis NR - significant increase in complications with frailty
Tegels et al[49] The Netherlands 5 R/P 70 59 Gastrectomy Groningen frailty index 28 6 NR 9.1 NR NR 30-d mortality 3.96 (95%CI: 1.12-14.09, P = 0.03)
1

According to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale ranging from 1 to 9 stars. Age and OS are presented as median values unless indicated otherwise. NR: Not reported; OS: Overall survival; OR: Odds ratio; P: Prospective trial; P/R: Retrospective analysis on prospectively collected data; R: Retrospective trial.