Outcomes and complications among nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery: A scoping review

Laurence Weinberg; Jarryd Ludski; Bradly Carp; Je Min Suh; Anoop N. Koshy; Cilla Haywood; Benjamin Churilov; Dong-Kyu Lee; Michael Yii

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0331755

Abstract

Introduction

This review was aimed at understanding the scope of evidence regarding outcomes and complications in nonagenarians (90–99 years of age) undergoing open cardiac surgery.

Methods

The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Review Protocol guidelines. A search of three databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, identified articles pertaining to nonagenarians undergoing various open cardiac surgical procedures. No restrictions were applied to study design or publication date.

Results

From the initial 1826 articles identified, we included 28 studies from eight countries in a total of 6411 nonagenarians. The median 30-day mortality rate was 10.5% (IQR 7.2–14.6). Postoperative complication rates were reported in 20 studies (71%), and the median major complication rate was 71.4%. Respiratory, cardiac, renal, neurologic, gastrointestinal, and/or infectious complications were reported in 19%, 20%, 14%, 18%, 5%, and 9% of cases, respectively. The median length of hospital stay was 12.5 days (IQR 10.4–18.0). No studies reported unplanned readmissions to the intensive care unit or detailed patient-centered outcome measures.

Conclusions

Although age alone should not preclude nonagenarians from undergoing cardiac surgery, the procedure is associated with a significantly elevated risk of morbidity and a relatively high mortality rate. The review findings emphasize the need for international registry data to identify risk factors associated with adverse outcomes, explore strategies to decrease the risk of major complications, and improve postoperative quality of life. Moreover, creating and implementing uniform preoperative frailty assessments, and correlating them with surgical outcomes, will be crucial. Developing standardized patient-reported experience and outcome measures will also be imperative. Scoping review registered on OSF registries (https://osf.io/4mg7n).

Citation: Weinberg L, Ludski J, Carp B, Suh JM, Koshy AN, Haywood C, et al. (2025) Outcomes and complications among nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery: A scoping review. PLoS One 20(9): e0331755. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755

Editor: Redoy Ranjan, Royal Holloway University of London, UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND

Received: June 26, 2024; Accepted: August 20, 2025; Published: September 8, 2025

Copyright: © 2025 Weinberg et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Global life expectancy has markedly increased. In many countries, the life expectancy exceeds 85 years, particularly among women [1]. Consequently, the expanding population of nonagenarians, individuals 90–99 years of age, is the fastest-growing demographic within the older population [2]. This demographic transformation underscores the growing importance of addressing the unique healthcare needs and challenges faced by this rapidly expanding age group. Historically, cardiac surgical options for nonagenarians have been limited; however, advancements in surgical techniques and anesthesia have increasingly enabled nonagenarians to safely undergo such procedures [3].

Given that ischemic and valvular heart disease, and acute coronary syndromes are highly prevalent among older people [4–8], the number of nonagenarians expected to undergo cardiac surgery is anticipated to rise. Because ischemic and valvular heart disease remains prevalent in people ≥90 years of age [4–8], and the nonagenarian population is projected to exceed 30 million people by 2030 [2], a clear and yet underexplored gap exists in age-specific perioperative outcome data. Nonagenarians often present with multiple comorbidities that decrease their functional reserves, thereby heightening their susceptibility to postoperative complications and increasing their mortality risk [9,10]. Despite the well-documented rise in the incidence of cardiovascular disease among nonagenarians and the increasing number of patients undergoing cardiac surgeries [3,11], data specific to this demographic and adequate information on age-specific outcomes remain lacking. Understanding these parameters will be crucial for guiding future research and equipping healthcare providers with the resources necessary to meet the surgical needs of nonagenarians. These findings might also substantially affect the allocation of healthcare resources. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review to identify critical knowledge gaps in the literature, to provide a foundation for guiding research aimed at advancing the understanding of nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery.

Objectives

This review provides an overview of the current landscape of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians, detailing inpatient, 30-day, and long-term complication and mortality rates. Additionally, the review evaluates key metrics, such as the lengths of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays, as well as the frequency of inpatient and hospital readmissions. Finally, as an exploratory outcome, the review identified whether patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) and experience measures (PREMs) have been included in studies examining outcomes in nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery, given that an absence of such data would itself constitute a notable finding. By addressing these objectives, this review highlights critical aspects of perioperative care and identifies gaps in the existing literature, to better inform future clinical practice and research.

Materials and methods

Study methods

This review was conducted to examine the scope of the existing literature on the outcomes and complications associated with cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. Anticipating a dearth of comprehensive studies, we used a broad search encompassing both peer-reviewed and grey literature mentioning “nonagenarians,” “cardiac surgery,” and related terms. Grey literature refers to materials produced outside commercial publishing and traditional academic frameworks, including institutional reports (e.g., government-issued policy documents), conference materials (e.g., proceedings and abstracts), and organizational publications (e.g., professional association guidelines or collaborative research group working papers).

This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines (S1 Table), to ensure methodological rigor and transparency throughout the review process [12]. We systematically reviewed the existing literature and applied the methodological frameworks of Arksey and O’Malley [13] and Levac et al. [14]. These methods have been described in detail in the scoping review protocol [15].

Protocol and registration

The study protocol was developed in collaboration with senior perioperative physicians specializing in cardiac surgery, to ensure a robust and clinically relevant approach. The protocol was designed to prioritize comprehensive evaluation of clinical outcomes following cardiac surgery in nonagenarians, addressing the unique challenges and considerations associated with this rapidly growing demographic. The protocol underwent peer review and was published in BMJ Open [15]. This process ensured effective protocol dissemination, public accessibility, and transparency. The review was also registered on Open Science Framework registries (https://osf.io/4mg7n).

Ethical considerations

This study relied on secondary data analysis, which is available in database of scientific literature and, therefore, it did not require submission to the Austin Health Human Research Ethics Committee. All analysis of data were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Search strategy

A search of three databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, identified articles pertaining to nonagenarians undergoing various open cardiac surgical procedures. To ensure comprehensive literature coverage, we identified supplementary studies through manual tracking of the references in the included articles. The search strategy is presented in S2 Table.

Types of studies

Studies and abstracts deemed eligible for inclusion in this review are summarized in Table 1. Editorials, study protocols, and dissertations were excluded from consideration, to maintain the focus on original research and ensure methodological rigor.

Download:

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.t001

Eligibility criteria

This review incorporated publications (with no start date restriction, published until August 29, 2023) reporting data on patients 90–99 years of age. The included literature comprised primary empirical studies, randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, and case reports, alongside full-text conference proceedings, abstracts, and posters. Non-English manuscripts were excluded unless they were accompanied by an English-language abstract meeting the eligibility criteria, in which case the full text was translated for evaluation. Restricting the search to English-language sources, despite potentially introducing geographic bias and limiting the generalizability of the findings, ensured methodological consistency in analysis and interpretation. This approach aligned with the exploratory nature of this review, which was aimed at systematically mapping available evidence rather than synthesizing global findings. Notably, a recent review supports that such language restrictions have minimal influence on the effect estimates or conclusions in most cases [16].

Given that the key aim of this review was to provide a synopsis of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians, the eligibility criteria included a wide range of open cardiac surgical procedures, as reported in the scoping review protocol [15]. These procedures encompassed coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and any valvular surgery (e.g., aortic, mitral, tricuspid, or pulmonary valve repair or replacement), atrial or ventricular septal defect closures; minimally invasive valvular surgeries requiring cardiopulmonary bypass, surgeries on the ascending aorta or aortic arch via sternotomy or thoracotomy, including hybrid stent-graft prostheses such as the frozen elephant Trunk procedure; heart transplantation; ventricular assist device implantation; left ventricular aneurysmectomy; surgeries on the descending aorta via sternotomy or thoracotomy (e.g., thoracoabdominal aortic repair or replacement); and removal of cardiac tumors or masses, with or without cardiopulmonary bypass.

Because they did not involve open-heart surgery, transcatheter aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedures were excluded from this review. We also excluded any percutaneous or transapical valvular implants or interventions, e.g., mitral valve clip implantation. Finally, open and endovascular abdominal aortic repairs, as well as thoracic endovascular aortic repairs, were excluded. These exclusions ensured a focus solely on the outcomes of open-heart surgical interventions. Further details regarding these procedures can be found in the publications selected for review [17–44] and their respective reference lists.

Study selection and screening procedure

A two-step screening process was conducted with the Covidence® web-based review platform. Our search identified eligible studies, and duplicates were excluded. A pilot test using our predefined eligibility criteria was then conducted on 200 randomly selected articles, to ensure the robustness of the data collection instruments before the full study. This test, performed by two authors (JL and BC), was also used to calibrate the reviewers’ use of screening protocols and ensure uniform application of the selection criteria.

The pilot review process led to the inclusion of nine studies and the exclusion of 191 studies, thus demonstrating the rigor of the selection method. Reviewer agreement was high, with a 95.6% concordance rate and a Cohen’s kappa coefficient of 0.643, indicating substantial inter-rater reliability. Full-text publications of all relevant and potentially eligible studies were retrieved and independently screened by two reviewers (JL and BC). Discrepancies were resolved through adjudication by a third reviewer (LW). Studies not meeting the inclusion criteria were excluded, and the entire process was systematically documented in adherence with PRISMA guidelines to ensure transparency and reproducibility.

Data extraction

The included studies were systematically charted in a customized data extraction form to ensure comprehensive, standardized collection of all relevant information, as previously reported [15]. Postoperative outcomes were meticulously captured, including complications, inpatient mortality, and mortality rates at 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years. Additionally, PROMs and PREMs were extracted to assess long-term effects from the patient perspective. This systematic approach ensured a robust dataset for analysis and synthesis.

Data synthesis and analysis

Data analysis was conducted in GraphPad Prism (v10.4.1, GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Continuous variables were assessed for normality with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and/or Q-Q plot visual inspection. Normally distributed data are presented as mean ± standard deviation, whereas nonparametric data are summarized as median (interquartile range [IQR]) with full range (minimum–maximum). Categorical variables were analyzed with the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, depending on the expected cell frequencies. For studies with substantial heterogeneity, a narrative-synthesis approach was used to contextualize patient-reported outcomes. A comparative analysis of study designs and participant characteristics was performed to identify research gaps.

This process, through systematically examining variations in methods and demographic profiles across studies, highlighted areas in which the existing evidence is limited or inconsistent, to potentially guide future research priorities and enhance understanding of the investigated topic. Our approach can therefore be accurately described as a narrative synthesis of quantitative findings, organized thematically around clinical domains (mortality, morbidity, and length of stay). This methodological flexibility enabled nuanced exploration of the complexity present in the literature while maintaining adherence to a coherent analytical framework. This framework facilitated the identification of knowledge gaps and the recognition of emerging trends within the field.

Patient and public involvement

This scoping review exclusively analyzed existing research and did not involve members of the public or direct participation from patients in its design, conduct, or dissemination.

Results

Study selection

From the initial screening process, a total of 1826 articles were identified. An additional 20 articles were identified through a search of the grey literature and reference tracking, to supplement the primary database search. However, no eligible articles were identified from the grey literature. In total, 81 full-text publications were assessed for eligibility, among which 28 studies [17–44] met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. The PRISMA flow diagram detailing the selection of studies is presented in Fig 1.

Download:

Fig 1. Study selection flow diagram.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.g001

Although a narrative synthesis approach was used for quantitative data, no qualitative themes were identified. In addition, our findings are descriptive and were derived from unweighted medians rather than means or pooled statistics, to avoid overinterpretation.

Study characteristics

All studies included in our review were reported in English (abstract and/or full text) and published between 1994 and 2022. The findings reported in these studies were collected between 1983 and 2019, during a median collection period of 9 years. All studies were retrospective in design. Whereas 18 studies (64%) were performed in the United States [17–22,25,26,28,34–37,39–43], the others were performed in Canada [22], the United Kingdom [23,27], Germany [31,32], Saudi Arabia [29], Australia [44], France [24], Japan [38], and Italy [30]. A total of 19 studies (68%) were performed in public hospitals [17–27,31–34,37–39,41], four (14%) were performed in private hospitals [30,35,40,42], and three (10%) were performed in both public and private facilities [28,36,44]. Study characteristics and outcome measures are presented in Table 2.

Download:

Table 2. Key characteristics of the included publications.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.t002

Risk of bias within the studies

The 28 publications selected for review were all retrospective cohort studies. According to the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network cohort study checklist, no studies were classified as “high-quality” evidence. However, all were deemed to be of “acceptable quality,” because they were based on clear and focused research questions.

Study population

A total of 6411 patients were included in the review, all of whom were ≥90 years of age and underwent CABG, valvular surgery, aortic dissection repair, or a combination thereof (distribution of surgery types in Fig 2). Of the 28 publications selected for review, 19 included patients who underwent a combination of surgical interventions: six focused solely on surgical aortic valve repair, one focused exclusively on CABG, and one focused on repair of type A aortic dissection. Detailed sociodemographic data beyond these descriptors was not provided.

Download:

Fig 2. Bubble plot illustrating in-hospital or 30-day mortality rates (%).

Each bubble represents a study, and bubble size corresponds to the number of patients included in the study (as indicated by the color gradient scale).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.g002

Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic clamp times

Whereas 15 publications reported the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, 13 reported the aortic cross-clamp (ACC) time. The median CPB time was 102 min (range, 60–152 min; IQR, 90–126), whereas the median ACC time was 60 min (range, 45–95 min; IQR 51.7–83.6). The CPB and ACC times in these studies are listed in S3 Table.

Risk stratification scores

Among the 21 studies (77.8%) reporting some form of a risk stratification score, 19 studies (70.4% of total) used the New York Heart Association functional classification, four studies (14.8% of total) used EuroScores, three studies (11.1% of total) used the American Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, and one study (3.7% of total) used the Charlson Comorbidity Index.

Primary outcomes

Mortality.

All 28 studies evaluated in-hospital or 30-day mortality rates. The median 30-day mortality rate was 10.5% (IQR 7.2–14.6). Nineteen studies also reported longer-term mortality rates. The in-hospital or 30-day mortality rates, together with the corresponding number of patients included in each study are presented graphically in Fig 2. The inpatient, 30-day, 1-year, 2-year, and overall mortality rates are shown in Fig 3. Mortality stratified by each study, together with the types of cardiac surgical procedures performed, is presented in Fig 4.

Download:

Fig 3. Box and whisker plots showing inpatient, 30-day, 1-year, 2-year, and overall mortality rates.

The box shows the median and 25th and 75th quartiles. The whiskers represent the minimum and maximum values.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.g003

Download:

Fig 4. Mortality stratified by each study, together with the types of cardiac surgical procedures performed.

Abbreviations: SAVR, surgical aortic valve replacement; CABG, coronary artery bypass; type AoD, type A aortic dissection repair; mixed, aortic, mitral, or tricuspid valve repair or replacement (or a combination thereof).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.g004

Incidence of complications.

Of the 28 (71.4%) studies, 20 reported postoperative complication rates; 3545 patients were included in this group, and the median overall complication rate was 71.4%. The reported complications were grouped into specific categories, including respiratory, cardiac, neurological, gastrointestinal, renal, infectious, arrhythmogenic, and hemorrhagic complications, as well as those requiring insertion of a permanent cardiac pacemaker. Respiratory, cardiac, renal, neurologic (i.e., confusion and disorientation), gastrointestinal, and/or infectious complications were reported in 19%, 20%, 14%, 18%, 5%, and 9% of these patients, respectively. Hemorrhagic and arrhythmogenic complications were reported in 9% and 45% of these patients, respectively, and 10% required pacemaker insertion. The overall complication rates by complication type are presented in S4 Table.

Secondary outcomes

Length of hospital and intensive care unit stay.

Fifteen publications reported the length of hospital stay, whose median was 12.5 days (IQR 10.3–18.0). Nine publications reported the length of ICU stay, whose median was 7.1 days (IQR 3.3–11.5) (S5 Table). No studies reported unplanned ICU readmissions.

Patient-reported experience and outcomes measures.

None of the included studies reported PROMs or PREMs; therefore, this study objective was unmet.

Discussion

As global life expectancy increases, and the nonagenarian population is predicted to exceed 30 million people by 2030 [2], the prevalence of symptomatic coronary and valvular heart diseases continues to increase [5,6]. Although percutaneous and transcatheter interventions are frequently evaluated in this age group, a notable proportion of these patients are not anatomically or technically suited for these procedures. In such cases, traditional cardiac surgery has become the preferred surgical option, regardless of patients’ advanced age. Consequently, the number of nonagenarians considering and undergoing surgical interventions will continue to increase. This scoping review provided a detailed synopsis of the current understanding of the perioperative course, complications, and the effects of these procedures on patients’ quality of life. An accurate understanding of the outcomes experienced by nonagenarians who have undergone cardiac surgery will be crucial for preoperative decision-making and appropriate informed consent [45].

Obtaining informed consent poses a major ethical challenge, particularly in the context of patients with cognitive decline or frailty, because these conditions can impair decisional capacity. Consequently, a nuanced approach is required to carefully balance respect for patient autonomy with the principle of beneficence. Ethical decision-making in this context also requires addressing broader considerations, such as avoiding ageism, ensuring equitable resource allocation, and upholding principles of justice. Central to this process is the use of patient-centered strategies grounded in comprehensive geriatric assessments, which provide a holistic understanding of patients’ medical, functional, and psychosocial needs to guide ethical and equitable care. Effective communication and shared decision-making processes are essential for navigating these complexities, and ensuring that care aligns with patients’ values and preferences while optimizing outcomes. [45,46].

Specific outcomes

Mortality.

Whereas all studies reported in-hospital or 30-day mortality, only 66% included detailed reports of long-term mortality. Overall, the median in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were below 11%, in agreement with the previously reported mortality rates of 7%–18% [31]. Interestingly, these mortality rates are somewhat lower than the reported rates of approximately 33% for elective cases and as high as 38% for emergency cases among nonagenarians undergoing high-risk non-cardiac surgery [10]. Several factors beyond the statistical methods are likely to have contributed to this counterintuitive finding. First, the stringent patient selection for cardiac surgery in nonagenarians creates a highly selected cohort: patients must demonstrate adequate physiological reserves, cognitive function, and life expectancy to justify the procedural risk. In contrast, non-cardiac surgery populations might include emergent presentations with less rigorous preoperative optimization. Second, the availability of transcatheter alternatives might selectively direct higher-risk nonagenarians away from open surgery. Frail patients might be triaged toward transcatheter aortic valve replacement or medical management, thus further contributing to the lower observed mortality. Third, the reported increase in mortality of nonagenarians undergoing non-cardiac surgery represents a general nonagenarian population rather than a highly selected cardiac-surgery cohort. Fourth, the data reflect predominantly high-income countries with advanced perioperative care systems, specialized cardiac surgery centers, and comprehensive postoperative support.

Although older patients are widely understood to be likely to have poorer surgical outcomes and experience greater morbidity than their younger counterparts, our findings suggest that nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery might have lower in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates than nonagenarians undergoing non-cardiac surgery [10]. The apparent reversal might reflect the intersection of careful patient selection, advanced healthcare infrastructure, and the inherent bias in studying only patients deemed suitable for major cardiac surgery. Collectively, the included studies reported a median long-term mortality rate of 43%, and a subset of studies reported an average 5-year mortality rate of 53%. As noted above, long-term mortality data were reported at time points ranging from 1 to 7.5 years. The lack of a uniform definition or method for assessing long-term mortality among nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery might create difficulties for anesthetists, physicians, surgeons, and patients seeking to weigh the potential benefits of surgery against the optimal medical management of their cardiovascular disease.

Complications.

Of the 28 publications, 20 reported complications experienced by nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery, and revealed a median complication rate of 71%, a value exceeding the 60% reported for major non-cardiac surgery [10]. The most frequently reported complications were arrhythmogenic complications, with an incidence of 45%, similarly to previously published findings [34]. Collectively, these findings suggest that atrial fibrillation occurs more frequently in nonagenarians than in younger patients undergoing cardiac surgery [25]. Although previous studies have highlighted the efficacy of prophylactic antiarrhythmic medications in decreasing postoperative atrial tachycardia in younger cardiac surgical patients, the generalizability of these findings to the nonagenarian population remains unclear [47]. The perioperative administration of these medications was not addressed in any studies included in this review. Moreover, a study published in 2023 by Gaudino et al. [48], including more than 1.2 million patients, has reported a coronary artery bypass grafting complication rate of only 15% among patients 59–73 years of age. Similarly, Bis et al. [49], in a study on postoperative conduction disturbances that included 15,000 patients within a similar age range, have found that permanent pacemaker implantation was required in only 1%–5% of cases. Respiratory, renal, and neurological (e.g., delirium) complications had reported median rates of 19%, 14%, and 18%, respectively. These complications frequently develop in vulnerable surgical populations [50].

The observed elevated complication rates have major implications for surgical decision-making in this cohort. Although advanced age alone should not preclude surgical intervention, the heightened risk of complications and mortality warrants careful consideration. The extant literature has reported postoperative complication rates reaching 60% in nonagenarians undergoing major surgery, and a 1-year mortality rate of approximately 20% after cardiac procedures. These substantial risks necessitate comprehensive discussions with patients and their families to facilitate informed decision-making. Surgeons must carefully balance the potential benefits of surgery against the associated risks, while considering patient preferences and anticipated postoperative quality of life. In assessing surgical candidacy, factors such as frailty, comorbidities, and functional status should be evaluated in conjunction with age. Moreover, the urgency of the procedure is a critical consideration, because elective surgeries generally yield more favorable outcomes than urgent or emergent surgeries. Ultimately, the decision to proceed with cardiac surgery in nonagenarians should be individualized, taking into account not only survival prospects but also the potential for improved functional status and quality of life.

Length of hospital and ICU stay.

ICU admission can have adverse physical, cognitive, and psychological effects on patients, which are frequently referred to as post-intensive care syndrome. This syndrome can lead to significant long-term adverse sequelae for patients undergoing surgery, as well as their families and caregivers [50]. Although the length of ICU stay is directly associated with diminished survival rates and quality of life [51], only five (18%) studies addressed both the length of hospital stay and ICU admission. Of the original 28 publications included in this study, nine (33%) reported the length of ICU admission, and 15 (54%) reported the length of hospital stay. Given the inconsistencies among these reports, the results of cross-study comparisons are unlikely to be highly reliable. The reported median ICU and hospital stays of 7.0 and 12.5 days, respectively, were longer than those previously reported for octogenarians [52]. Better understanding of the factors contributing to these prolonged admissions is needed to improve informed decision-making and optimize the selection of nonagenarians most likely to benefit from surgery.

Quality of life outcome measures and frailty.

Whereas all studies included in this review reported in-hospital or 30-day mortality rates, nearly one-third did not report long-term mortality rates. Less than one-third of the studies included quality-of-life metrics but used inconsistent reporting standards [22]. Furthermore, baseline function and comorbidities were reported in only 18 of the original 28 studies.

Our results revealed a notable scarcity of literature examining the effects of frailty on cardiac surgery outcomes in nonagenarians. Indeed, nonagenarians in relatively poor health might potentially have been steered away from these procedures by physicians, family members, or themselves. Overall, we identified no consistent use of specific frailty scores, and analyses of the effects of frailty on patient outcomes after cardiac surgery were limited. Similarly, long-term age-related health status following major noncardiac surgery remains largely unaddressed. In one small study including 159 octogenarians and nonagenarians who underwent non-cardiac surgery, only 50% of the patients survived for more than 3 years [53]. Whereas our review of recent evidence suggested that good surgical outcomes can be achieved with careful patient selection, and that age alone should not be a barrier to surgery, a previous study has reported that 25% of patients older than 85 years undergoing noncardiac surgery experienced a moderate, severe, or total limitation in functional capacity [54]. Our scoping review revealed a substantial gap in the literature: very few reports have focused specifically on functional outcomes in older patients who have undergone cardiac surgery.

Implications and knowledge gaps

Our review summarized the body of evidence and crucial outcome indicators and shed light on the unique challenges faced by nonagenarians after cardiac surgery. Collectively, our findings underscored that age alone should not be a disqualifying factor for surgery. With careful selection, this patient group experiences a relatively low perioperative 30-day mortality rate, thus highlighting the importance of considering postoperative complications and prolonged ICU stays. Although we extracted elective versus emergency classification, when provided, the reporting was inconsistent; therefore, improved standardization is warranted in future research. Whereas the 1-year mortality rate was approximately 20%, the lack of PROM and PREM data suggested that post-surgical quality of life remains largely undetermined.

This review emphasizes the need to standardize complication grading and reporting in cardiac surgery for nonagenarians (Table 3). The findings also highlight the need for prospective trials and reviews of international registry data to identify risk factors associated with adverse outcomes in nonagenarians, explore potential measures to decrease the risk of severe complications, and improve the quality of life after surgery.

Download:

Table 3. Recommended minimum standards for reporting on nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.t003

Strengths and limitations

This review has several notable strengths. First, it provided a comprehensive analysis of mortality and complication rates in nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery, thereby offering valuable insights into the outcomes associated with these high-risk procedures. Additionally, the findings underscored critical gaps in the current literature and suggested several directions for future research that might enhance understanding of the postoperative trajectory in nonagenarian patients. Such advancements might potentially inform clinical decision-making and optimize care strategies for this vulnerable population. The findings might also be used to facilitate informed preoperative discussions and decision-making by physicians, surgeons, anesthetists, and, most importantly, patients and their families.

This review has several limitations. First, patient-level data were not reported in many of the included studies. Therefore, analyses could be performed only on reported population data, which provided no insights into specific pre-existing comorbidities, frailty, or the urgency of surgical intervention. Unfortunately, most included studies did not stratify outcomes by surgical urgency, thus constraining our ability to evaluate the differential effects of elective vs. emergent procedures. Furthermore, although we collected data reported for 6411 nonagenarians included in 28 publications, two studies [40,43] performed in the past 2–6 years accounted for more than half of those patients, and included those most likely to benefit from the most recent developments in this field. We acknowledge that the patients included in our review from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database [23] might overlap with patients in the nine other studies included in this review. This potential crossover is an important consideration in interpreting our findings. However, after exclusion of these studies from the analysis, our results were unchanged. This finding further highlights the need for future research to more precisely quantify the extent of patient overlap in multi-center cardiac surgery studies. Third, because of the apparent heterogeneity in comorbidity and functional status, we were unable to generate strong conclusions regarding preoperative status and its potential effects on postoperative outcomes and quality of life. Because no sociodemographic data were available, the generalizability of our findings across sexes, ethnicities, regions, and countries of origin remains unclear.

Finally, we acknowledge that a substantial proportion of the articles included in our analysis were older than 10 years and consequently might not fully reflect current medical practices, particularly given the increasing prominence of endovascular procedures in treating nonagenarian patients across various cardiovascular domains, including structural valve pathology. However, the included studies provide historical context and insight into the evolution of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians; highlight advancements and shifts in treatment paradigms over time; and offer a broader perspective on long-term outcomes and complications, which are crucial for understanding the durability and effectiveness of interventions. Finally, our findings cannot be generalized to lower-resource settings or lower- and middle-income countries, where risk profiles and outcomes may differ significantly.

Ethical tensions, individual benefits, and resource allocation

Providing open cardiac surgery to nonagenarians presents complex health economic and ethical challenges, particularly in resource-constrained settings and lower- and middle-income countries, where healthcare systems often operate with limited capacity and funding. The cost of cardiac surgery is substantial, and prolonged ICU stays, increased complication rates, and extended hospital admissions are often involved, thereby contributing to higher healthcare expenditures than required for younger cohorts. Moreover, in lower- and middle-income countries, where access to expensive interventions must be weighed against broader public health needs, questions arise regarding whether prioritizing high-cost procedures in the oldest populations constitutes an equitable or sustainable use of limited resources. Consequently, tension exists between the ethical principle of individual beneficence, providing the best possible care to a single patient, and the utilitarian imperative to maximize health outcomes at the population level. Ivashkov and Van Norman have argued that surgical decision-making in older adults must balance respect for autonomy with realistic expectations of benefit and resource stewardship, particularly when quality of life might be diminished by frailty, comorbidities, or cognitive impairment [71]. Similarly, Altawalbeh et al. have highlighted how age-related ethical frameworks must incorporate considerations of distributive justice, given that the opportunity cost of providing intensive treatment to nonagenarians might result in denying care to younger or more functionally independent patients [46]. Because surgical outcomes in the oldest populations remain highly variable, and data on long-term functional recovery remain sparse, healthcare policymakers must increasingly confront the moral dilemma of whether aggressive interventions are justifiable when life expectancy and quality-adjusted life years might be limited. Accordingly, transparent, culturally sensitive, and evidence-informed triage frameworks are essential to support ethical and economically sound decision-making in cardiac surgery for the oldest populations. As demographics shift globally, policies must reconcile economic realism with ethical imperatives to avoid discriminatory rationing, and must uphold the “fair innings” principle aimed at equitable health opportunities across lifespans [72,73].

Future directions

This scoping review highlights several important avenues for future research. Among these, establishing a standard time point for assessing long-term mortality, and applying and validating objective pre- and postoperative functional status and quality-of-life metrics, might be beneficial [74,75]. Such initiatives stand to greatly improve understanding of the short- and long-term effects of cardiac surgery in nonagenarian populations beyond immediate survival and complication rates.

Creating and implementing uniform preoperative frailty assessments, and correlating them with surgical outcomes, will also be crucial. Assessments should include preoperative residential status, hospital discharge destination, and independence in activities of daily living 12 months post-cardiac surgery. In addition, the development of standardized PROMs and PREMs tailored to nonagenarians is imperative. These tools provide healthcare providers with essential data to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions in terms of quality-adjusted life years, thereby offering a common value currency for comparing different disease states [76].

Future research should prioritize investigating the specific effects of individual cardiac procedures, particularly in nonagenarian populations, to provide more nuanced insights beyond the aggregated outcomes of all open cardiac interventions. Such studies would offer valuable evidence to support informed decision-making tailored to this unique demographic. Additionally, the effects of cardiac surgery on functional status and quality of life are critical areas for further exploration, because these outcomes are central to patient-centered care. Leveraging data from large national registry databases, such as SWEDEHEART [77], presents opportunities to expand upon existing findings, and generate robust evidence to inform clinical practice and policy.

Finally, the findings presented in this review might assist cardiac surgeons, anesthetists, and perioperative clinicians in assessing both the quantifiable risks and functional unknowns of cardiac surgery, and further provide patients and their families with critical information to guide discussions focused on the benefits and risks of proceeding with cardiac surgery or seeking alternative management strategies.

Conclusions

This scoping review highlights that, although age alone should not be a barrier to cardiac surgery for nonagenarians, this surgery is associated with significantly elevated morbidity and a relatively high mortality rate. Notably, among patients in this age range, one in ten die, and two-thirds of patients succumb to complications within 30 days post-surgery. Most of these patients experience extended intensive care stays. Despite these challenges, most of these patients are ultimately discharged from the hospital. A critical gap in the literature is the scarcity of data on quality-of-life measures and patient-reported outcomes, which are essential for informed clinical discussions and consent. Incorporating these factors into decision-making processes will be crucial to ensure that care aligns with patients’ values and preferences, particularly in this vulnerable population. Future research should prioritize the collection and analysis of these outcomes to enhance the quality and relevance of care for nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery.

Our review highlights major gaps in the collective knowledge base and specific areas requiring further research, including standardized methods for reporting complications, patient-centered outcomes, functional recovery metrics, and long-term mortality data. Addressing these gaps would enhance understanding of patient selection criteria, as well as the perioperative and postoperative experiences of nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.s001

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Full search strategies for all electronic databases.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.s002

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp: times reported by the publications included in the review.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.s003

(DOCX)

S4 Table. Overall complication rates listed by type.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.s004

(DOCX)

S5 Table. Length of hospital and intensive care stay.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331755.s005

(DOCX)

Guarantor

Prof. Laurence Weinberg is the guarantor.

References

1. Life expectancy of the world population. Available from: https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/
2. United Nations. Revision of World Population Prospects. Available from: https://population.un.org/wpp/
3. Sagiv D, Migirov L, Lipschitz N, Dagan E, Glikson E, Wolf M, et al. The admission patterns of octogenerians nonagenerians and centenarians to the Department of Otoloaryngology. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273(12):4615–21. pmid:27356556
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
4. Nicolini F, Agostinelli A, Vezzani A, Manca T, Benassi F, Molardi A, et al. The evolution of cardiovascular surgery in elderly patient: a review of current options and outcomes. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:736298. pmid:24812629
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
5. Friedrich I, Simm A, Kötting J, Thölen F, Fischer B, Silber R-E. Cardiac surgery in the elderly patient. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009;106(25):416–22. pmid:19623310
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
6. van Bemmel T, Delgado V, Bax JJ, Gussekloo J, Blauw GJ, Westendorp RG, et al. Impact of valvular heart disease on activities of daily living of nonagenarians: the Leiden 85-plus study a population based study. BMC Geriatr. 2010;10:17. pmid:20359367
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
7. Kodali SK, Velagapudi P, Hahn RT, Abbott D, Leon MB. Valvular heart disease in patients ≥80 years of age. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018 May;71(18):2058–72.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
8. Narendren A, Whitehead N, Burrell LM, Yudi MB, Yeoh J, Jones N, et al. Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Older People: Comprehensive Review and Multidisciplinary Practice-Based Recommendations. J Clin Med. 2024;13(15):4416. pmid:39124683
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
9. Ogawa T, Schermann H, Kobayashi H, Fushimi K, Okawa A, Jinno T. Age and clinical outcomes after hip fracture surgery: do octogenarian, nonagenarian and centenarian classifications matter? Age Ageing. 2021;50(6):1952–60. pmid:34228781
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
10. Fowler AJ, Abbott TEF, Prowle J, Pearse RM. Age of patients undergoing surgery. Br J Surg. 2019;106(8):1012–8. pmid:31115918
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
11. Watters JM. Surgery in the elderly. Can J Surg. 2002;45(2):104–8. pmid:11939651
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
12. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. pmid:30178033
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19–32.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
14. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69. pmid:20854677
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
15. Ludski J, Carp B, Makar T, Yii M, Lee D-K, Weinberg L. Outcomes and complications of nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2023;13(7):e072293. pmid:37463807
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
16. Dobrescu AI, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Wagner G, Persad E, Sommer I, et al. Restricting evidence syntheses of interventions to English-language publications is a viable methodological shortcut for most medical topics: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;137:209–17. pmid:33933579
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
17. Tsai TP, Denton TA, Chaux A, Matloff JM, Kass RM, Blanche C, et al. Results of coronary artery bypass grafting and/or aortic or mitral valve operation in patients > or = 90 years of age. Am J Cardiol. 1994;74(9):960–2. pmid:7977134
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
18. Samuels LE, Sharma S, Morris RJ, Kuretu ML, Grunewald KE, Strong MD 3rd, et al. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. J Card Surg. 1996;11(2):121–7. pmid:8811406
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
19. Blanche C, Matloff JM, Denton TA, Khan SS, DeRobertis MA, Nessim S, et al. Cardiac operations in patients 90 years of age and older. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;63(6):1685–90. pmid:9205168
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
20. Miller DJ, Samuels LE, Kaufman MS, Morris RJ, Thomas MP, Brockman SK. Coronary artery bypass surgery in nonagenarians. Angiology. 1999;50(8):613–7. pmid:10451228
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
21. Bacchetta MD, Ko W, Girardi LN, Mack CA, Krieger KH, Isom OW, et al. Outcomes of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: a 10-year experience. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;75(4):1215–20. pmid:12683566
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
22. Bridges CR, Edwards FH, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, Ferguson TB. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians and centenarians. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;197(3):347–56; discussion 356-7. pmid:12946784
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
23. Edwards M-B, Taylor KM. Outcomes in nonagenarians after heart valve replacement operation. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2003 ;75(3):830–4.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
24. Levy Praschker BG, Leprince P, Bonnet N, Rama A, Bors V, Lievre L, et al. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: hospital mortality and long-term follow-up. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2006;5(6):696–9. pmid:17670686
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
25. Roberts WC, Ko JM, Matter GJ. Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in nonagenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98(9):1251–3. pmid:17056341
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
26. Hovanesyan A, Moon MR, Rich MW. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2007;48(6):757–60. pmid:17947934
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
27. Guilfoyle MR, Drain AJ, Khan A, Ferguson J, Large SR, Nashef SAM. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: single-centre series and review. Gerontology. 2010;56(4):378–84. pmid:20051660
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
28. Ullery BW, Peterson JC, Milla F, Wells MT, Briggs W, Girardi LN, et al. Cardiac surgery in select nonagenarians: should we or shouldn’t we? Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85(3):854–60. pmid:18291156
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
29. Hajabed H, Rezk A, Ouda W, Gallo R. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarian. Should we operate? Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery 2010;10:s152–s153.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
30. Speziale G, Nasso G, Barattoni MC, Bonifazi R, Esposito G, Coppola R, et al. Operative and middle-term results of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. Circulation. 2010 Jan 19;121(2):208–13. pmid:20048216
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
31. Easo J, Hölzl PPF, Horst M, Dikov V, Litmathe J, Dapunt O. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: pushing the boundary one further decade. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2011;53(2):229–32. pmid:21168925
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
32. Assmann A, Minol J-P, Mehdiani A, Akhyari P, Boeken U, Lichtenberg A. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: Not only feasible, but also reasonable? Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2013 ;17(2):340–3. pmid:23628651
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
33. Caceres M, Cheng W, De Robertis M, Mirocha JM, Czer L, Esmailian F, et al. Survival and quality of life for Nonagenarians after cardiac surgery. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2013;95(5):1598–602. pmid:23566648
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
34. Davis JP, LaPar DJ, Crosby IK, Kern JA, Lau CL, Kron IL, et al. Nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery. J Card Surg. 2014;29(5):600–4. pmid:25039683
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
35. Murashita T, Greason KL, Suri RM, Nkomo VT, Holmes DR, Rihal CS, et al. Aortic valve replacement for severe aortic valve stenosis in the nonagenarian patient. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2014 ;98(5):1593–7. pmid:25200726
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
36. Mack MC, Szerlip M, Herbert MA, Akram S, Worley C, Kim RJ, et al. Outcomes of Treatment of Nonagenarians With Severe Aortic Stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100(1):74–80. pmid:26013708
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
37. George I, Yerebakan H, Kalesan B, Nazif T, Kodali S, Smith CR, et al. Age alone should not preclude surgery: Contemporary outcomes after aortic valve replacement in nonagenarians. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2014;148(4). pmid:24560419
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
38. Ohnuma T, Shinjo D, Fushimi K. Hospital mortality of patients aged 80 and older after surgical repair for type A acute aortic dissection in Japan. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(31):e4408. pmid:27495057
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
39. Tiwari A, Gupta A, Subzposh F, McCaffrey J, Koman E, Saltzman H, et al. Outcomes of transvenous lead extraction in nonagenarians. J Am Coll Cardiology. 2016;67(13):816.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
40. Zack CJ, Al-Qahtani F, Kawsara A, Al-Hijji M, Amin AH, Alkhouli M. Comparative Outcomes of Surgical and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis in Nonagenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2017;119(6):893–9. pmid:28061996
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
41. Elgendy IY, Mahmoud AN, Elbadawi A, Elgendy AY, Omer MA, Megaly M, et al. In-hospital outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement for nonagenarians. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(5):989–95. pmid:30569661
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
42. Elsisy MF, Schaff HV, Crestanello JA, Alkhouli MA, Stulak JM, Stephens EH. Outcomes of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. J Card Surg. 2022;37(6):1664–70. pmid:35285545
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
43. Khalid Y, Khalid F, Dasu K, Dasu N. TCT-495 Insights From the National Inpatient Sample 2012 to 2019: Comparing SAVR vs TAVR Outcomes in Nonagenarians and Centenarians. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2022;80(12):B201.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
44. Weinberg L, Walpole D, Lee DK, D’Silva M, Chan JW, Miles LF, et al. Modern Cardiac Surgical Outcomes in Nonagenarians: A Multicentre Retrospective Observational Study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:865008. pmid:35911518
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
45. Ivashkov Y, Van Norman GA. Informed consent and the ethical management of the older patient. Anesthesiology Clinics. 2009;27: 569–580. pmid:19825493
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
46. Altawalbeh SM, Alkhateeb FM, Attarabeen OF. Ethical issues in consenting older adults.Altawalbeh SM, Alkhateeb FM, Attarabeen OF. Ethical Issues in Consenting Older Adults: Academic Researchers and Community Perspectives. J Pharm Health Serv Res. 2020;11(1):25–32. pmid:33042231
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
47. Mitchell LB, Exner DV, Wyse DG, Connolly CJ, Prystai GD, Bayes AJ, et al. Prophylactic Oral Amiodarone for the Prevention of Arrhythmias that Begin Early After Revascularization, Valve Replacement, or Repair: PAPABEAR: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;294(24):3093–100. pmid:16380589
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
48. Gaudino M, Chadow D, Rahouma M, Soletti GJ, Sandner S, Perezgrovas-Olaria R, et al. Operative Outcomes of Women Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in the US, 2011 to 2020. JAMA Surg. 2023;158(5):494–502. pmid:36857059
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
49. Bis J, Gościńska-Bis K, Gołba KS, Gocoł R, Zębalski M, Deja MA. Permanent pacemaker implantation after cardiac surgery: Optimization of the decision making process. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;162(3):816–824.e3. pmid:32178919
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
50. Morgan A. Long-term outcomes from critical care. Surgery (Oxford). 2021;39(1):53–7. pmid:33519011
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
51. Widyastuti Y, Stenseth R, Wahba A, Pleym H, Videm V. Length of intensive care unit stay following cardiac surgery: is it impossible to find a universal prediction model?. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012;15(5):825–32. pmid:22833511
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
52. Scott BH, Seifert FC, Grimson R, Glass PSA. Octogenarians undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: resource utilization, postoperative mortality, and morbidity. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2005;19(5):583–8. pmid:16202890
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
53. Gazala S, Tul Y, Wagg A, Widder SL, Khadaroo RG, Acute Care and Emergency Surgery (ACES) Group. Quality of life and long-term outcomes of octo- and nonagenarians following acute care surgery: a cross sectional study. World J Emerg Surg. 2013;8(1):23. pmid:23816269
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
54. Canada Division of Aging and Seniors Health. Canada’s Aging Population. Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Public Works and Government Services. 2002.
55. Howell SJ, Nair S. Measuring frailty in the older surgical patient: The case for evidence synthesis. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2021;126(4):763–7. pmid:33573772
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
56. Hasan TF, Kelley RE, Cornett EM, Urman RD, Kaye AD. Cognitive impairment assessment and interventions to optimize surgical patient outcomes. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology. 2020;34(2):225–53. pmid:32711831
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
57. Haller G, Bampoe S, Cook T, Fleisher LA, Grocott MPW, Neuman M, et al. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative: clinical indicators. Br J Anaesth. 2019;123(2):228–37. pmid:31128879
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
58. Jammer I, Wickboldt N, Sander M, Smith A, Schultz MJ, Pelosi P, et al. Standards for definitions and use of outcome measures for clinical effectiveness research in perioperative medicine: European Perioperative Clinical Outcome (EPCO) definitions: a statement from the ESA-ESICM joint taskforce on perioperative outcome measures. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015;32(2):88–105. pmid:25058504
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
59. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13. pmid:15273542
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
60. Abbott TEF, Fowler AJ, Pelosi P, Gama de Abreu M, Møller AM, Canet J, et al. A systematic review and consensus definitions for standardised end-points in perioperative medicine: pulmonary complications. Br J Anaesth. 2018;120(5):1066–79. pmid:29661384
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
61. Myles PS, Weitkamp B, Jones K, Melick J, Hensen S. Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-40. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(1):11–5. pmid:10740540
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
62. Stark PA, Myles PS, Burke JA. Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score. Anesthesiology. 2013;118(6):1332–40. pmid:23411725
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
63. Bennett-Guerrero E, Welsby I, Dunn TJ, Young LR, Wahl TA, Diers TL, et al. The use of a postoperative morbidity survey to evaluate patients with prolonged hospitalization after routine, moderate-risk, elective surgery. Anesth Analg. 1999;89(2):514–9. pmid:10439777
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
64. Grocott MPW, Browne JP, Van der Meulen J, Matejowsky C, Mutch M, Hamilton MA, et al. The Postoperative Morbidity Survey was validated and used to describe morbidity after major surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(9):919–28. pmid:17689808
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
65. Bell M, Eriksson LI, Svensson T, Hallqvist L, Granath F, Reilly J, et al. Days at Home after Surgery: An Integrated and Efficient Outcome Measure for Clinical Trials and Quality Assurance. EClinicalMedicine. 2019;11:18–26. pmid:31317130
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
66. Myles PS, Shulman MA, Heritier S, Wallace S, McIlroy DR, McCluskey S, et al. Validation of days at home as an outcome measure after surgery: a prospective cohort study in Australia. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e015828. pmid:28821518
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
67. Jerath A, Austin PC, Wijeysundera DN. Days Alive and Out of Hospital: Validation of a Patient-centered Outcome for Perioperative Medicine. Anesthesiology. 2019;131(1):84–93. pmid:31094760
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
68. Shulman MA, Myles PS, Chan MTV, McIlroy DR, Wallace S, Ponsford J. Measurement of disability-free survival after surgery. Anesthesiology. 2015;122(3):524–36. pmid:25689757
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
69. Andrews G, Kemp A, Sunderland M, Von Korff M, Ustun TB. Normative data for the 12 item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. PLoS One. 2009;4(12):e8343. pmid:20020047
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
70. Kingsley C, Patel S. Patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. BJA Education. 2017;17(4):137–44.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
71. Ivashkov Y, Van Norman GA. Informed consent and the ethical management of the older patient. Anesthesiol Clin. 2009;27(3):569–80, table of contents. pmid:19825493
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
72. Kuylen MNI, Kim SY, Ruck Keene A, Owen GS. Should age matter in COVID-19 triage? A deliberative study. J Med Ethics. 2021;47(5):291–5.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
73. Oehring D, Gunasekera P. Ethical Frameworks and Global Health: A Narrative Review of the “Leave No One Behind” Principle. Inquiry. 2024;61:469580241288346. pmid:39385394
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
74. Lin S-Y, Kerse N, McLean C, Moyes SA. Validation of quality of life and functional measures for older people for telephone administration. J Prim Health Care. 2010;2(1):35–42. pmid:20690401
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
75. Rahman IA, Kendall S. Cardiac surgery in the very elderly: it isn’t all about survival. Br J Cardiol. 2020;27(1):05. pmid:35747424
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
76. Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5–21. pmid:21037243
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
77. Bäck M, Leosdottir M, Hagström E, Norhammar A, Hag E, Jernberg T, et al. The SWEDEHEART secondary prevention and cardiac rehabilitation registry (SWEDEHEART CR registry). Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2021;7(5):431–7. pmid:34097023
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Life expectancy of the world population. Available from: https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/

[ref2] 2. United Nations. Revision of World Population Prospects. Available from: https://population.un.org/wpp/

[ref3] 3. Sagiv D, Migirov L, Lipschitz N, Dagan E, Glikson E, Wolf M, et al. The admission patterns of octogenerians nonagenerians and centenarians to the Department of Otoloaryngology. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273(12):4615–21. pmid:27356556
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[4] View Article

[5] PubMed/NCBI

[6] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Nicolini F, Agostinelli A, Vezzani A, Manca T, Benassi F, Molardi A, et al. The evolution of cardiovascular surgery in elderly patient: a review of current options and outcomes. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:736298. pmid:24812629
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[8] View Article

[9] PubMed/NCBI

[10] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Friedrich I, Simm A, Kötting J, Thölen F, Fischer B, Silber R-E. Cardiac surgery in the elderly patient. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009;106(25):416–22. pmid:19623310
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[12] View Article

[13] PubMed/NCBI

[14] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. van Bemmel T, Delgado V, Bax JJ, Gussekloo J, Blauw GJ, Westendorp RG, et al. Impact of valvular heart disease on activities of daily living of nonagenarians: the Leiden 85-plus study a population based study. BMC Geriatr. 2010;10:17. pmid:20359367
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[16] View Article

[17] PubMed/NCBI

[18] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. Kodali SK, Velagapudi P, Hahn RT, Abbott D, Leon MB. Valvular heart disease in patients ≥80 years of age. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018 May;71(18):2058–72.
View Article
Google Scholar

[20] View Article

[21] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Narendren A, Whitehead N, Burrell LM, Yudi MB, Yeoh J, Jones N, et al. Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Older People: Comprehensive Review and Multidisciplinary Practice-Based Recommendations. J Clin Med. 2024;13(15):4416. pmid:39124683
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[23] View Article

[24] PubMed/NCBI

[25] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Ogawa T, Schermann H, Kobayashi H, Fushimi K, Okawa A, Jinno T. Age and clinical outcomes after hip fracture surgery: do octogenarian, nonagenarian and centenarian classifications matter? Age Ageing. 2021;50(6):1952–60. pmid:34228781
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[27] View Article

[28] PubMed/NCBI

[29] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Fowler AJ, Abbott TEF, Prowle J, Pearse RM. Age of patients undergoing surgery. Br J Surg. 2019;106(8):1012–8. pmid:31115918
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[31] View Article

[32] PubMed/NCBI

[33] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Watters JM. Surgery in the elderly. Can J Surg. 2002;45(2):104–8. pmid:11939651
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[35] View Article

[36] PubMed/NCBI

[37] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. pmid:30178033
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[39] View Article

[40] PubMed/NCBI

[41] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19–32.
View Article
Google Scholar

[43] View Article

[44] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69. pmid:20854677
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[46] View Article

[47] PubMed/NCBI

[48] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Ludski J, Carp B, Makar T, Yii M, Lee D-K, Weinberg L. Outcomes and complications of nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2023;13(7):e072293. pmid:37463807
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[50] View Article

[51] PubMed/NCBI

[52] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Dobrescu AI, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Wagner G, Persad E, Sommer I, et al. Restricting evidence syntheses of interventions to English-language publications is a viable methodological shortcut for most medical topics: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;137:209–17. pmid:33933579
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[54] View Article

[55] PubMed/NCBI

[56] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Tsai TP, Denton TA, Chaux A, Matloff JM, Kass RM, Blanche C, et al. Results of coronary artery bypass grafting and/or aortic or mitral valve operation in patients > or = 90 years of age. Am J Cardiol. 1994;74(9):960–2. pmid:7977134
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[58] View Article

[59] PubMed/NCBI

[60] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Samuels LE, Sharma S, Morris RJ, Kuretu ML, Grunewald KE, Strong MD 3rd, et al. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. J Card Surg. 1996;11(2):121–7. pmid:8811406
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[62] View Article

[63] PubMed/NCBI

[64] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Blanche C, Matloff JM, Denton TA, Khan SS, DeRobertis MA, Nessim S, et al. Cardiac operations in patients 90 years of age and older. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;63(6):1685–90. pmid:9205168
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[66] View Article

[67] PubMed/NCBI

[68] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Miller DJ, Samuels LE, Kaufman MS, Morris RJ, Thomas MP, Brockman SK. Coronary artery bypass surgery in nonagenarians. Angiology. 1999;50(8):613–7. pmid:10451228
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[70] View Article

[71] PubMed/NCBI

[72] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Bacchetta MD, Ko W, Girardi LN, Mack CA, Krieger KH, Isom OW, et al. Outcomes of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: a 10-year experience. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;75(4):1215–20. pmid:12683566
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[74] View Article

[75] PubMed/NCBI

[76] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Bridges CR, Edwards FH, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, Ferguson TB. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians and centenarians. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;197(3):347–56; discussion 356-7. pmid:12946784
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[78] View Article

[79] PubMed/NCBI

[80] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Edwards M-B, Taylor KM. Outcomes in nonagenarians after heart valve replacement operation. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2003 ;75(3):830–4.
View Article
Google Scholar

[82] View Article

[83] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Levy Praschker BG, Leprince P, Bonnet N, Rama A, Bors V, Lievre L, et al. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: hospital mortality and long-term follow-up. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2006;5(6):696–9. pmid:17670686
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[85] View Article

[86] PubMed/NCBI

[87] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Roberts WC, Ko JM, Matter GJ. Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in nonagenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98(9):1251–3. pmid:17056341
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[89] View Article

[90] PubMed/NCBI

[91] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Hovanesyan A, Moon MR, Rich MW. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2007;48(6):757–60. pmid:17947934
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[93] View Article

[94] PubMed/NCBI

[95] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Guilfoyle MR, Drain AJ, Khan A, Ferguson J, Large SR, Nashef SAM. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: single-centre series and review. Gerontology. 2010;56(4):378–84. pmid:20051660
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[97] View Article

[98] PubMed/NCBI

[99] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Ullery BW, Peterson JC, Milla F, Wells MT, Briggs W, Girardi LN, et al. Cardiac surgery in select nonagenarians: should we or shouldn’t we? Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85(3):854–60. pmid:18291156
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[101] View Article

[102] PubMed/NCBI

[103] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Hajabed H, Rezk A, Ouda W, Gallo R. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarian. Should we operate? Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery 2010;10:s152–s153.
View Article
Google Scholar

[105] View Article

[106] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Speziale G, Nasso G, Barattoni MC, Bonifazi R, Esposito G, Coppola R, et al. Operative and middle-term results of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. Circulation. 2010 Jan 19;121(2):208–13. pmid:20048216
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[108] View Article

[109] PubMed/NCBI

[110] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. Easo J, Hölzl PPF, Horst M, Dikov V, Litmathe J, Dapunt O. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: pushing the boundary one further decade. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2011;53(2):229–32. pmid:21168925
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[112] View Article

[113] PubMed/NCBI

[114] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. Assmann A, Minol J-P, Mehdiani A, Akhyari P, Boeken U, Lichtenberg A. Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: Not only feasible, but also reasonable? Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2013 ;17(2):340–3. pmid:23628651
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[116] View Article

[117] PubMed/NCBI

[118] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Caceres M, Cheng W, De Robertis M, Mirocha JM, Czer L, Esmailian F, et al. Survival and quality of life for Nonagenarians after cardiac surgery. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2013;95(5):1598–602. pmid:23566648
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[120] View Article

[121] PubMed/NCBI

[122] Google Scholar

[ref34] 34. Davis JP, LaPar DJ, Crosby IK, Kern JA, Lau CL, Kron IL, et al. Nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery. J Card Surg. 2014;29(5):600–4. pmid:25039683
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[124] View Article

[125] PubMed/NCBI

[126] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. Murashita T, Greason KL, Suri RM, Nkomo VT, Holmes DR, Rihal CS, et al. Aortic valve replacement for severe aortic valve stenosis in the nonagenarian patient. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2014 ;98(5):1593–7. pmid:25200726
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[128] View Article

[129] PubMed/NCBI

[130] Google Scholar

[ref36] 36. Mack MC, Szerlip M, Herbert MA, Akram S, Worley C, Kim RJ, et al. Outcomes of Treatment of Nonagenarians With Severe Aortic Stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100(1):74–80. pmid:26013708
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[132] View Article

[133] PubMed/NCBI

[134] Google Scholar

[ref37] 37. George I, Yerebakan H, Kalesan B, Nazif T, Kodali S, Smith CR, et al. Age alone should not preclude surgery: Contemporary outcomes after aortic valve replacement in nonagenarians. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2014;148(4). pmid:24560419
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[136] View Article

[137] PubMed/NCBI

[138] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. Ohnuma T, Shinjo D, Fushimi K. Hospital mortality of patients aged 80 and older after surgical repair for type A acute aortic dissection in Japan. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(31):e4408. pmid:27495057
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[140] View Article

[141] PubMed/NCBI

[142] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Tiwari A, Gupta A, Subzposh F, McCaffrey J, Koman E, Saltzman H, et al. Outcomes of transvenous lead extraction in nonagenarians. J Am Coll Cardiology. 2016;67(13):816.
View Article
Google Scholar

[144] View Article

[145] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. Zack CJ, Al-Qahtani F, Kawsara A, Al-Hijji M, Amin AH, Alkhouli M. Comparative Outcomes of Surgical and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis in Nonagenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2017;119(6):893–9. pmid:28061996
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[147] View Article

[148] PubMed/NCBI

[149] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. Elgendy IY, Mahmoud AN, Elbadawi A, Elgendy AY, Omer MA, Megaly M, et al. In-hospital outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement for nonagenarians. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(5):989–95. pmid:30569661
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[151] View Article

[152] PubMed/NCBI

[153] Google Scholar

[ref42] 42. Elsisy MF, Schaff HV, Crestanello JA, Alkhouli MA, Stulak JM, Stephens EH. Outcomes of cardiac surgery in nonagenarians. J Card Surg. 2022;37(6):1664–70. pmid:35285545
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[155] View Article

[156] PubMed/NCBI

[157] Google Scholar

[ref43] 43. Khalid Y, Khalid F, Dasu K, Dasu N. TCT-495 Insights From the National Inpatient Sample 2012 to 2019: Comparing SAVR vs TAVR Outcomes in Nonagenarians and Centenarians. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2022;80(12):B201.
View Article
Google Scholar

[159] View Article

[160] Google Scholar

[ref44] 44. Weinberg L, Walpole D, Lee DK, D’Silva M, Chan JW, Miles LF, et al. Modern Cardiac Surgical Outcomes in Nonagenarians: A Multicentre Retrospective Observational Study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:865008. pmid:35911518
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[162] View Article

[163] PubMed/NCBI

[164] Google Scholar

[ref45] 45. Ivashkov Y, Van Norman GA. Informed consent and the ethical management of the older patient. Anesthesiology Clinics. 2009;27: 569–580. pmid:19825493
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[166] View Article

[167] PubMed/NCBI

[168] Google Scholar

[ref46] 46. Altawalbeh SM, Alkhateeb FM, Attarabeen OF. Ethical issues in consenting older adults.Altawalbeh SM, Alkhateeb FM, Attarabeen OF. Ethical Issues in Consenting Older Adults: Academic Researchers and Community Perspectives. J Pharm Health Serv Res. 2020;11(1):25–32. pmid:33042231
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[170] View Article

[171] PubMed/NCBI

[172] Google Scholar

[ref47] 47. Mitchell LB, Exner DV, Wyse DG, Connolly CJ, Prystai GD, Bayes AJ, et al. Prophylactic Oral Amiodarone for the Prevention of Arrhythmias that Begin Early After Revascularization, Valve Replacement, or Repair: PAPABEAR: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;294(24):3093–100. pmid:16380589
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[174] View Article

[175] PubMed/NCBI

[176] Google Scholar

[ref48] 48. Gaudino M, Chadow D, Rahouma M, Soletti GJ, Sandner S, Perezgrovas-Olaria R, et al. Operative Outcomes of Women Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in the US, 2011 to 2020. JAMA Surg. 2023;158(5):494–502. pmid:36857059
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[178] View Article

[179] PubMed/NCBI

[180] Google Scholar

[ref49] 49. Bis J, Gościńska-Bis K, Gołba KS, Gocoł R, Zębalski M, Deja MA. Permanent pacemaker implantation after cardiac surgery: Optimization of the decision making process. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;162(3):816–824.e3. pmid:32178919
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[182] View Article

[183] PubMed/NCBI

[184] Google Scholar

[ref50] 50. Morgan A. Long-term outcomes from critical care. Surgery (Oxford). 2021;39(1):53–7. pmid:33519011
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[186] View Article

[187] PubMed/NCBI

[188] Google Scholar

[ref51] 51. Widyastuti Y, Stenseth R, Wahba A, Pleym H, Videm V. Length of intensive care unit stay following cardiac surgery: is it impossible to find a universal prediction model?. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012;15(5):825–32. pmid:22833511
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[190] View Article

[191] PubMed/NCBI

[192] Google Scholar

[ref52] 52. Scott BH, Seifert FC, Grimson R, Glass PSA. Octogenarians undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: resource utilization, postoperative mortality, and morbidity. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2005;19(5):583–8. pmid:16202890
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[194] View Article

[195] PubMed/NCBI

[196] Google Scholar

[ref53] 53. Gazala S, Tul Y, Wagg A, Widder SL, Khadaroo RG, Acute Care and Emergency Surgery (ACES) Group. Quality of life and long-term outcomes of octo- and nonagenarians following acute care surgery: a cross sectional study. World J Emerg Surg. 2013;8(1):23. pmid:23816269
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[198] View Article

[199] PubMed/NCBI

[200] Google Scholar

[ref54] 54. Canada Division of Aging and Seniors Health. Canada’s Aging Population. Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Public Works and Government Services. 2002.

[ref55] 55. Howell SJ, Nair S. Measuring frailty in the older surgical patient: The case for evidence synthesis. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2021;126(4):763–7. pmid:33573772
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[203] View Article

[204] PubMed/NCBI

[205] Google Scholar

[ref56] 56. Hasan TF, Kelley RE, Cornett EM, Urman RD, Kaye AD. Cognitive impairment assessment and interventions to optimize surgical patient outcomes. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology. 2020;34(2):225–53. pmid:32711831
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[207] View Article

[208] PubMed/NCBI

[209] Google Scholar

[ref57] 57. Haller G, Bampoe S, Cook T, Fleisher LA, Grocott MPW, Neuman M, et al. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative: clinical indicators. Br J Anaesth. 2019;123(2):228–37. pmid:31128879
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[211] View Article

[212] PubMed/NCBI

[213] Google Scholar

[ref58] 58. Jammer I, Wickboldt N, Sander M, Smith A, Schultz MJ, Pelosi P, et al. Standards for definitions and use of outcome measures for clinical effectiveness research in perioperative medicine: European Perioperative Clinical Outcome (EPCO) definitions: a statement from the ESA-ESICM joint taskforce on perioperative outcome measures. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015;32(2):88–105. pmid:25058504
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[215] View Article

[216] PubMed/NCBI

[217] Google Scholar

[ref59] 59. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13. pmid:15273542
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[219] View Article

[220] PubMed/NCBI

[221] Google Scholar

[ref60] 60. Abbott TEF, Fowler AJ, Pelosi P, Gama de Abreu M, Møller AM, Canet J, et al. A systematic review and consensus definitions for standardised end-points in perioperative medicine: pulmonary complications. Br J Anaesth. 2018;120(5):1066–79. pmid:29661384
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[223] View Article

[224] PubMed/NCBI

[225] Google Scholar

[ref61] 61. Myles PS, Weitkamp B, Jones K, Melick J, Hensen S. Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-40. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(1):11–5. pmid:10740540
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[227] View Article

[228] PubMed/NCBI

[229] Google Scholar

[ref62] 62. Stark PA, Myles PS, Burke JA. Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score. Anesthesiology. 2013;118(6):1332–40. pmid:23411725
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[231] View Article

[232] PubMed/NCBI

[233] Google Scholar

[ref63] 63. Bennett-Guerrero E, Welsby I, Dunn TJ, Young LR, Wahl TA, Diers TL, et al. The use of a postoperative morbidity survey to evaluate patients with prolonged hospitalization after routine, moderate-risk, elective surgery. Anesth Analg. 1999;89(2):514–9. pmid:10439777
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[235] View Article

[236] PubMed/NCBI

[237] Google Scholar

[ref64] 64. Grocott MPW, Browne JP, Van der Meulen J, Matejowsky C, Mutch M, Hamilton MA, et al. The Postoperative Morbidity Survey was validated and used to describe morbidity after major surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(9):919–28. pmid:17689808
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[239] View Article

[240] PubMed/NCBI

[241] Google Scholar

[ref65] 65. Bell M, Eriksson LI, Svensson T, Hallqvist L, Granath F, Reilly J, et al. Days at Home after Surgery: An Integrated and Efficient Outcome Measure for Clinical Trials and Quality Assurance. EClinicalMedicine. 2019;11:18–26. pmid:31317130
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[243] View Article

[244] PubMed/NCBI

[245] Google Scholar

[ref66] 66. Myles PS, Shulman MA, Heritier S, Wallace S, McIlroy DR, McCluskey S, et al. Validation of days at home as an outcome measure after surgery: a prospective cohort study in Australia. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e015828. pmid:28821518
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[247] View Article

[248] PubMed/NCBI

[249] Google Scholar

[ref67] 67. Jerath A, Austin PC, Wijeysundera DN. Days Alive and Out of Hospital: Validation of a Patient-centered Outcome for Perioperative Medicine. Anesthesiology. 2019;131(1):84–93. pmid:31094760
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[251] View Article

[252] PubMed/NCBI

[253] Google Scholar

[ref68] 68. Shulman MA, Myles PS, Chan MTV, McIlroy DR, Wallace S, Ponsford J. Measurement of disability-free survival after surgery. Anesthesiology. 2015;122(3):524–36. pmid:25689757
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[255] View Article

[256] PubMed/NCBI

[257] Google Scholar

[ref69] 69. Andrews G, Kemp A, Sunderland M, Von Korff M, Ustun TB. Normative data for the 12 item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. PLoS One. 2009;4(12):e8343. pmid:20020047
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[259] View Article

[260] PubMed/NCBI

[261] Google Scholar

[ref70] 70. Kingsley C, Patel S. Patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. BJA Education. 2017;17(4):137–44.
View Article
Google Scholar

[263] View Article

[264] Google Scholar

[ref71] 71. Ivashkov Y, Van Norman GA. Informed consent and the ethical management of the older patient. Anesthesiol Clin. 2009;27(3):569–80, table of contents. pmid:19825493
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[266] View Article

[267] PubMed/NCBI

[268] Google Scholar

[ref72] 72. Kuylen MNI, Kim SY, Ruck Keene A, Owen GS. Should age matter in COVID-19 triage? A deliberative study. J Med Ethics. 2021;47(5):291–5.
View Article
Google Scholar

[270] View Article

[271] Google Scholar

[ref73] 73. Oehring D, Gunasekera P. Ethical Frameworks and Global Health: A Narrative Review of the “Leave No One Behind” Principle. Inquiry. 2024;61:469580241288346. pmid:39385394
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[273] View Article

[274] PubMed/NCBI

[275] Google Scholar

[ref74] 74. Lin S-Y, Kerse N, McLean C, Moyes SA. Validation of quality of life and functional measures for older people for telephone administration. J Prim Health Care. 2010;2(1):35–42. pmid:20690401
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[277] View Article

[278] PubMed/NCBI

[279] Google Scholar

[ref75] 75. Rahman IA, Kendall S. Cardiac surgery in the very elderly: it isn’t all about survival. Br J Cardiol. 2020;27(1):05. pmid:35747424
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[281] View Article

[282] PubMed/NCBI

[283] Google Scholar

[ref76] 76. Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5–21. pmid:21037243
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[285] View Article

[286] PubMed/NCBI

[287] Google Scholar

[ref77] 77. Bäck M, Leosdottir M, Hagström E, Norhammar A, Hag E, Jernberg T, et al. The SWEDEHEART secondary prevention and cardiac rehabilitation registry (SWEDEHEART CR registry). Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2021;7(5):431–7. pmid:34097023
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[289] View Article

[290] PubMed/NCBI

[291] Google Scholar

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Introduction

Objectives

Materials and methods

Study methods

Protocol and registration

Ethical considerations

Search strategy

Types of studies

Eligibility criteria

Study selection and screening procedure

Data extraction

Data synthesis and analysis

Patient and public involvement

Results

Study selection

Study characteristics

Risk of bias within the studies

Study population

Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic clamp times

Risk stratification scores

Primary outcomes

Mortality.

Incidence of complications.

Secondary outcomes

Length of hospital and intensive care unit stay.

Patient-reported experience and outcomes measures.

Discussion

Specific outcomes

Mortality.

Complications.

Length of hospital and ICU stay.

Quality of life outcome measures and frailty.

Implications and knowledge gaps

Strengths and limitations

Ethical tensions, individual benefits, and resource allocation

Future directions

Conclusions

Supporting information

S1 Table. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist.

S2 Table. Full search strategies for all electronic databases.

S3 Table. Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp: times reported by the publications included in the review.

S4 Table. Overall complication rates listed by type.

S5 Table. Length of hospital and intensive care stay.

Guarantor

References