Frailty represents a loss of physiologic reserve across multiple biological systems, confers a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, and is highly prevalent among people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We evaluated the measurement properties of frailty tools used in CKD and summarized the association of frailty with death and hospitalization.

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Studies assessing multidimensional frailty tools in adults at any stage of CKD and evaluating a measurement property of interest as per the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments taxonomy.

Observational studies and randomized trials.

Risk and precision measurements; measurement properties.

The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment was the clinical standard for frailty identification. We pooled data using random effects models or summarized with narrative synthesis when data were too heterogenous to pool.

We included 105 studies with data for at least one of the following: discriminative (n = 84; 80%), convergent (n = 20; 19%), and criterion validity (n = 2; 2%); responsiveness (n = 9; 9%) and reliability (n = 1; 0.1%). For the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP), the pooled adjusted HR (aHR) for mortality was 2.01 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.35-2.98; P = 0.001; I 2 = 58%) and 1.89 (95% CI, 1.25-2.85; P = 0.002; I 2 = 0%) for hospitalization in kidney failure (KF) populations. The pooled aHR for the Clinical Frailty Scale for mortality in pre-frail versus non-frail was 1.75 (95% CI, 1.17-2.60; I 2 = 26%) and 2.20 (95% CI, 1.00-4.80; I 2 = 66%) in frail versus non-frail. The Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness, and Loss of weight scale showed consistent discriminative validity for higher mortality in non-dialysis CKD. The modified FFP (self-reported) showed acceptable discriminative validity and agreement with the FFP in patients with KF. In CKD and KF populations, agreement between clinicians' subjective impression of frailty and frailty tools was low.

Few studies compared the accuracy of frailty tools to the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. Only 1 study reported reliability. Studies were of overall low-moderate quality.

The FFP and Clinical Frailty Scale showed acceptable discriminant validity for clinical outcomes, and the modified FFP is an alternative tool to use if direct measurements are not feasible. The evidence does not support the use of clinicians' subjective impression to identify frailty.

Frailty is frequently assessed in elderly patients as an indicator of poor outcomes after hospitalization and surgery. Compared to age-matched nonfrail people, frail people need greater assistance with everyday activities and are more likely to suffer adverse events leading to mortality. Recently, the hospital frailty risk score (HFRS) was proposed for quantifying frailty. The number of older people with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is continuing to increase, and more data have shown that frailty could predict adverse outcomes in kidney transplantation (KT) patients. Moreover, the pre-kidney transplantation HFRS was strongly associated with surgical complications and other adverse and postoperative outcomes. However, it is yet unknown how frailty affects transplant failure prognosis, inpatient mortality and morbidity, and infection. In this retrospective observational study, we extracted data on 185,742 patients from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database in the United States. The patients were further separated into three groups based on the HFRS. The study revealed that 24.6% of admitted patients who underwent KT were frail (HFRS > = 5). HFRS stratification can be used to predict the risk of in-hospital mortality, longer LOS, graft failure, and adverse discharge. Furthermore, frail patients who undergo KT are more likely to develop severe infection according to the HFRS-defined frailty classification. According to these findings, frailty remains a severe problem after KT, and patients who undergo KT should be monitored to prevent adverse effects.

Frailty occurs frequently among patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, especially among women. Assessing frailty in kidney transplant (KT) candidates is crucial for informing them about associated risks. However, there is poor agreement between frailty scales and research on their correlation with transplant outcomes. Being prefrail significantly impacts both graft and patient survival, often beginning with just 1 Fried criterion. Rather than viewing frailty as a categorical state, it should be regarded as a spectrum ranging from 1 to 5 criteria, with the risk of adverse outcomes escalating as frailty worsens. Frailty status fluctuates during the waiting period for KT; hence, a 1-time frailty evaluation is insufficient to determine risks and implement strategies for improving functional status. Further research should investigate the components of frailty that most frequently change during this waiting period and establish strategies to prevent or reverse frailty. Although careful evaluation of frail KT candidates is necessary to prevent early complications and mortality, exclusion based solely on a frailty score is unwarranted. Instead, efforts should focus on timely interventions to enhance their condition before transplantation. Although evidence is limited, exercise programs appear feasible and yield positive results. A pretransplant clinical framework encompassing multimodal prehabilitation-comprising physical therapy, nutritional measures, and psychological support-during the waiting list period may help alleviate the effects of frailty and poor fitness after KT, ultimately improving key outcomes. Despite logistical challenges, there is a pressing need for interventional trials in this area.

Kidney transplantation (KT), although the best treatment option for eligible patients, entails maintaining and adhering to a life-long treatment regimen of medications, lifestyle changes, self-care, and appointments. Many patients experience uncertain outcome trajectories increasing their vulnerability and symptom burden and generating complex care needs. Even when transplants are successful, for some patients the adjustment to life post-transplant can be challenging and psychological difficulties, economic challenges and social isolation have been reported. About 50% of patients lose their transplant within 10 years and must return to dialysis or pursue another transplant or conservative care. This paper documents the complicated journey patients undertake before and after KT and outlines some initiatives aimed at improving patient-centered care in transplantation. A more cohesive approach to care that borrows its philosophical approach from the established field of supportive oncology may improve patient experiences and outcomes. We propose the "supportive care in transplantation" care model to operationalize a patient-centered approach in transplantation. This model can build on other ongoing initiatives of other scholars and researchers and can help advance patient-centered care through the entire care continuum of kidney transplant recipients and candidates. Multi-dimensionality, multi-disciplinarity and evidence-based approaches are proposed as other key tenets of this care model. We conclude by proposing the potential advantages of this approach to patients and healthcare systems.

There is no data evaluating the impact of Medicaid expansion on kidney transplants (KT) in Oklahoma.

To investigate the impact of Medicaid expansion on KT patients in Oklahoma.

The UNOS database was utilized to evaluate data pertaining to adult KT recipients in Oklahoma in the pre-and post-Medicaid eras. Bivariate analysis, Kaplan Meier analysis was used to estimate, and cox proportional models were utilized.

There were 2758 pre- and 141 recipients in the post-Medicaid expansion era. Post-expansion patients were more often non-United States citizens (2.3% vs 5.7%), American Indian, Alaskan, or Pacific Islander (7.8% vs 9.2%), Hispanic (7.4% vs 12.8%), or Asian (2.5% vs 8.5%) (P < 0.0001). Waitlist time was shorter in the post-expansion era (410 vs 253 d) (P = 0.0011). Living donor rates, pre-emptive transplants, re-do transplants, delayed graft function rates, kidney donor profile index values, panel reactive antibodies levels, and insurance types were similar. Patients with public insurance were more frail. Despite increased early (< 6 months) rejection rates, 1-year patient and graft survival were similar. In Cox proportional hazards model, male sex, American Indian, Alaskan or Pacific Islander race, public insurance, and frailty category were independent risk factors for death at 1 year. Medicaid expansion was not associated with graft failure or patient survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.07; 95%CI: 0.26-4.41).

Medicaid expansion in Oklahoma is associated with increased KT access for non-White/non-Black and non-United States citizen patients with shorter wait times. 1-year graft and patient survival rates were similar before and after expansion. Medicaid expansion itself was not independently associated with graft or patient survival outcomes. Ongoing research is necessary to determine the long-term effects of Medicaid expansion.

There is controversy surrounding the association between preexisting frailty and increased mortality in candidates and recipients of solid-organ transplants. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of preexisting frailty on survival outcomes in solid-organ transplant candidates and recipients.

A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Sciences, and Embase databases until October 2, 2023. Two reviewers independently selected the eligible studies according to the PECOS criteria: Participants (candidates and recipients of solid-organ transplants), Exposure (frailty), Comparison (no-frailty), Outcomes (waitlist or posttransplant mortality), and Study design (retrospective or prospective cohort studies). The pooled effects were summarized by pooling the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the frail patients than those without frailty.

Sixteen studies with 10091 patients met the eligibility criteria. Depending on the frailty tools used, the prevalence of frailty in solid-organ transplant candidates/recipients ranged from 4.6 % to 45.1 %. Frailty was significantly associated with an increased risk of waitlist mortality (HR 2.44; 95 % CI 1.84-3.24) and posttransplant mortality (HR 2.23; 95 % CI 1.61-3.09) in solid-organ transplant candidates and recipients, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that the association of preexisting frailty with waitlist mortality and posttransplant mortality appeared to stronger in kidney transplant candidates (HR 2.70; 95 % CI 1.93-3.78) and lung transplantation recipients (HR 2.52; 95 % CI 1.23-5.15).

Frailty is a significant predictor of reduced survival in solid-organ transplant candidates and recipients. Assessment of frailty has the potential to identify patients who are suitable for transplantation.

The organisational care needs involved in accessing kidney transplant have not been described in the literature and therefore a detailed analysis thereof could help to establish a framework (including appropriate timing, investment, and costs) for the management of this population. The main objective of this study is to analyse the profile and care needs of kidney transplant candidates in a tertiary hospital and the direct costs of studying them.

A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted using data on a range of variables (sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, study duration, and investment in visits and supplementary tests) from 489 kidney transplant candidates evaluated in 2020.

The comorbidity index was high (> 4 in 64.3%), with a mean of 5.6 ± 2.4. Part of the study population had certain characteristics that could hinder their access a kidney transplant: physical dependence (9.4%), emotional distress (33.5%), non-adherent behaviours (25.2%), or language barriers (9.4%). The median study duration was 6.6[3.4;14] months. The ratio of required visits to patients was 5.97:1, meaning an investment of €237.10 per patient, and the ratio of supplementary tests to patients was 3.5:1, meaning an investment of €402.96 per patient.

The study population can be characterised as complex due to their profile and their investment in terms of time, visits, supplementary tests, and direct costs. Management based on our results involves designing work-adaptation strategies to the needs of the study population, which can lead to increased patient satisfaction, shorter waiting times, and reduced costs.

Frailty is a clinical syndrome that is characterised by decline in multiple systems with associated decreased physiological reserve and ability to respond to stressor events. It is associated with greater healthcare burden. It is common in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Kidney transplantation is considered the optimal form of renal replacement therapy for suitable patients with ESRD. However, surgery and immunosuppression are physiological stresses that can disproportionately affect frail individuals. Frailty is emerging as a potentially important risk factor in patients waitlisted for kidney transplantation. Most of the published research to date in this area comes from a single transplant centre in the USA. Frailty, as measured using the Physical Frailty Phenotype (FP), is prevalent in waitlisted patients and has been associated with early hospital re-admission, prolonged length of stay, delayed graft function and increased mortality after kidney transplantation. However, although kidney transplantation is a substantial physiological stress to a patient's reserve, by restoring kidney function, kidney transplantation has also been shown to improve a patient's frailty status. The FP is the most studied tool in patients waitlisted for transplantation, but it has not been able to distinguish those whose frailty is improved by kidney transplantation. In summary, there remain significant gaps in knowledge and uncertainties as to how to effectively use existing frailty measures to inform decision-making around kidney transplantation. Further research is needed to address these important gaps in the literature.

An increasing number of older patients are undergoing evaluation for kidney transplantation; however, older patients experience increased rates of complications compared with younger patients, leading to the study of frailty assessments. Although many centers have evaluated the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP), less is known about the ability of the Short Performance Physical Battery (SPPB) to predict outcomes.

Frailty assessment by FFP and SPPB was introduced into routine outpatient evaluation for patients aged 55 years and older referred for transplantation. Transplant rate, length of stay, readmission up to 3 months posttransplant, and death were reviewed. Patients were evaluated in an initial cohort followed by a validation cohort by FFP and SPPB. Multivariate analysis correcting for demographic characteristics was applied.

Patient cohorts reflected the racial and ethnic diversity of our population, including approximately 40% Hispanic patients. The first cohort of 514 patients demonstrated a significant association between frailty as measured by SPPB and transplantation (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% CI, 1.38-3.83; p = .002). The second cohort of 1408 patients validated the association between frailty measured by SPPB and transplantation (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.83-4.48; p < .001). In addition, there was a significant association between nonfrail status measured by SPPB and death (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.62; p = .006).

Frailty assessment is a potentially useful approach for the assessment of transplant candidates. Our real-world study examined the performance of 2 methods of frailty evaluation methods in a diverse population, demonstrating that SPPB but not FFP was predictive of clinical outcomes. Incorporation of frailty assessments into transplant evaluation may improve risk stratification and optimize outcomes for older patients.

Not much is known about the significance of nutritional status and support in transplant surgery, least of all in simultaneous pancreatic and kidney transplantation. Malnutrition in the context of simultaneous pancreatic-kidney transplantation seems to be complex and a still poorly investigated problem. Since SPKTX is highly qualified and also has a small volume procedure, it is difficult to obtain data from large cohorts of patients. The aim of this article is to gather existing evidence and information about the subject, as well as to elicit some questions and goals for the future.

We searched through the Pub-Med database using the keywords "pancreas and kidney transplantation" combined with "nutritional risk", "nutritional status", "malnutrition", "nutritional intervention", and "frailty", finding a total of 4103 matching results. We then narrowed it down to articles written in English with the full text available. We also researched through the references of articles most accurately matching our researched terms.

There are numerous tools that have been investigated for the screening of malnutrition, such as the NRI index, PNI index, NLR, SGA scale, and NRS-2002 scale, each of which proved to be of some use in predicting patient outcomes in different surgical settings. Since all of them differed in components and assessed parameters and, in the absence of more sensitive or infallible indicators, the most reasonable approach seems to evaluate them jointly.

It is important to underline the necessity of nutritional screening and the subsequent introduction of adequate therapy while awaiting transplantation in an attempt to improve results. Considering the complexity of surgical procedures and the severity of underlying diseases with their intense metabolic components, the patient's nutritional status seems to significantly influence results. Consequently, nutritional risk assessments should be a part of the routine care of patients qualified for transplantation.

Frailty is frequently reported following sleep disorders; however, the extent to which sleep disorders influence frailty remains unclear. In the current study, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the quantitative effects of different sleep disorders on frailty in the elderly.

We conducted a systematic search of several databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus, to retrieve articles published from May 2009 to June 2021. The data outcomes are expressed as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Eighteen studies were included, with 39669 participants. Older adults with sleep disorders were found to have a higher risk of frailty (pooled OR = 1.49, 95%CI = 1.35-1.64, p < 0.01). Specifically, daytime sleepiness (pooled OR = 1.69, 95%CI = 1.09-2.61, p < 0.01), short sleep duration (pooled OR = 1.36, 95%CI = 1.20-1.54, p = 0.45), long sleep duration (pooled OR = 1.99, 95%CI = 1.39-2.85, p = 0.02), sleep latency extension (pooled OR = 1.38, 95%CI = 1.19-1.60, p = 0.72), and sleep disordered breathing (pooled OR = 1.30, 95%CI = 1.11-1.53, p = 0.37) were correlated with frailty.

The risk of frailty differs between older adults with sleep disorders and controls, suggesting that the relationships between different sleep disorders and frailty vary. These results highlight the need to monitor sleep disorders of the elderly and conduct intervention to prevent or delay the frailty process.

Malnutrition has a negative impact on patients with chronic diseases and its early identification is a priority. The primary objective of this diagnostic accuracy study was to assess the performance of the phase angle (PhA), a bioimpedance analysis (BIA)-derived parameter, for malnutrition screening using the Global Leadership Initiative for Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria as the reference standard in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) waiting for kidney transplantation (KT); criteria associated with low PhA in this population were also analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative likelihood ratios, predictive values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated for PhA (index test) and compared with GLIM criteria (reference standard). Of 63 patients (62.9 years old; 76.2% men), 22 (34.9%) had malnutrition. The PhA threshold with the highest accuracy was ≤4.85° (sensitivity 72.7%, specificity 65.9%, and positive and negative likelihood ratios 2.13 and 0.41, respectively). A PhA ≤ 4.85° was associated with a 3.5-fold higher malnutrition risk (OR = 3.53 (CI95% 1.0-12.1)). Considering the GLIM criteria as the reference standard, a PhA ≤ 4.85° showed only fair validity for detecting malnutrition, and thus cannot be recommended as a stand-alone screening tool in this population.

There is currently no consensus as to a standardized tool for frailty measurement in any patient population. In the solid-organ transplantation population, routinely identifying and quantifying frailty in potential transplant candidates would support patients and the multidisciplinary team to make well-informed, individualized, management decisions. The aim of this scoping review was to synthesise the literature regarding frailty measurement in solid-organ transplant (SOT) candidates.

A search of four databases (Cochrane, Pubmed, EMBASE and CINAHL) yielded 3124 studies. 101 studies (including heart, kidney, liver, and lung transplant candidate populations) met the inclusion criteria.

We found that studies used a wide range of frailty tools (N = 22), including four 'established' frailty tools. The most commonly used tools were the Fried Frailty Phenotype and the Liver Frailty Index. Frailty prevalence estimates for this middle-aged, predominantly male, population varied between 2.7% and 100%. In the SOT candidate population, frailty was found to be associated with a range of adverse outcomes, with most evidence for increased mortality (including post-transplant and wait-list mortality), post-operative complications and prolonged hospitalisation. There is currently insufficient data to compare the predictive validity of frailty tools in the SOT population.

Overall, there is great variability in the approach to frailty measurement in this population. Preferably, a validated frailty measurement tool would be incorporated into SOT eligibility assessments internationally with a view to facilitating comparisons between patient sub-groups and national and international transplant services with the ultimate goal of improved patient care.

Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) is the most used frailty instrument among kidney transplant recipients, classifying patients as pre-frail if they have 1-2 criteria and as frail if they have ≥3. However, different definitions of robustness have been used among renal patients, including only those who have 0 criteria, or those with 0-1 criteria. Our aim was to determine the impact of one PFP criterion on transplant outcomes.

We undertook a retrospective study of 296 kidney transplant recipients who had been evaluated for frailty by PFP at the time of evaluating for transplantation.

Only 30.4% of patients had 0 criteria, and an additional 42.9% showed one PFP criterion. As PFP score increased, a higher percentage of women and cerebrovascular disease were found. Recipients with 0-1 criteria had lower 1-year mortality after transplant than those with ≥2 (1.8% vs 10.1%), but this difference was already present when we only considered those who scored 0 (mortality 1.1%) and 1 (mortality 2.4%) separately. The multivariable analysis confirmed that one PFP criterion was associated to a higher risk of patient death after kidney transplantation [hazard ratio 3.52 (95% confidence interval 1.03-15.9)].

Listed kidney transplant candidates frequently show only one PFP frailty criterion. This has an independent impact on patient survival after transplantation.