Abstract
Background: Frailty is one of the most common symptoms in patients with cirrhosis. Many researchers have identified it as a prognostic factor for patients with cirrhosis. However, no quantitative meta-analysis has evaluated the prognostic value of frailty in patients with cirrhosis.
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the prognostic significance of frailty in patients with cirrhosis.
Methods: The systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) recommendations. We conducted a comprehensive search of the literature using databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, as well as China National Knowledge Infrastructure, encompassing the period from inception to 22 December 2023. Data were extracted for frailty to predict adverse outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. RevMan (version 5.3) and R (version 4.2.2) were used to assess the extracted data.
Results: A total of 26 studies with 9597 patients with cirrhosis were included. Compared with patients having low or no frailty, the frail group had a higher mortality rate (relative ratio, RR=2.07, 95% CI 1.82‐2.34, P<.001), higher readmission rate (RR=1.50, 95% CI 1.22‐1.84, P<.001), and lower quality of life (RR=5.78, 95% CI 2.25‐14.82, P<.001). The summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve of frailty for mortality in patients with cirrhosis showed that the false positive rate (FPR) was 0.25 (95% CI 0.17-0.34), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 4.17 (95% CI 2.93-5.93), sensitivity was 0.54 (95% CI 0.39-0.69), and specificity was 0.73 (95% CI 0.64-0.81). The SROC curve of readmission showed that the FPR, DOR, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.39 (95% CI 0.17-0.66), 1.38 (95% CI 0.64-2.93), 0.46 (95% CI 0.28-0.64), and 0.60 (95% CI 0.28-0.85), respectively.
Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrated that frailty is a reliable prognostic predictor of outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. To enhance the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis, more studies on frailty screening are required.
Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42024497698; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=497698
doi:10.2196/60683
Keywords
Introduction
Background
Cirrhosis is a prevalent illness worldwide and is linked with substantial morbidity and mortality [,]. According to a recent report by Smith et al [], cirrhosis has resulted in the deaths of over 40,000 individuals in America, ranking it as the 12th most prevalent cause of death. Furthermore, it is the third most prevalent cause of mortality among individuals aged 45‐64 years []. The global annual mortality from chronic liver disease is estimated to be approximately 2 million. Amongst them, cirrhosis is associated with the advancement of chronic inflammatory diseases and accounts for approximately 45% of all-cause mortality worldwide [].
Cirrhosis often causes physiological decline, making patients more vulnerable to frailty, which further compromises their overall health []. Frailty is a clinical syndrome defined by increased susceptibility and impaired antistress response due to the cumulative functional loss of numerous physiological systems []. Furthermore, frailty is characterized by a deterioration across three primary domains: physical health, mental health, and social function []. Previously, frailty was considered primarily a geriatric condition linked with aging, although its link to chronic diseases is now extensively understood [-].
At present, evidence is increasing that frailty is a risk factor for increased mortality and complications, longer hospital stays, risk of falls, and other issues in patients with cirrhosis [-]. However, the assessment tools used in prior research on the unfavorable consequences of patients with cirrhosis vary, and more investigation is required to determine the prognostic significance of frailty in these individuals [,]. The prognostic significance of frailty in patients with cirrhosis is inconsistent among different studies and requires immediate clarification [,]. For example, several researchers have demonstrated that frailty serves as a prognostic indicator for mortality in individuals with cirrhosis [,], but conflicting findings have been reported in another investigation []. In addition, one study explored the relationship between frailty and outcome in patients with cirrhosis, but it only demonstrated that frailty can predict liver transplant-free survival; the risk of other complications remains unknown []. There are still limited systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the prognostic value of frailty in patients with cirrhosis.
Objective
Therefore, to determine the association between frailty and the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis, we did a comprehensive review and meta-analysis on the predictive value of frailty in the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis. This information can help develop targeted management measures for patients with cirrhosis and promote their well-being.
Methods
Protocol Registration
The study protocol was officially registered on the PROSPERO website (No. CRD42024497698).
Search Strategy
A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, as well as the China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, to identify potential articles describing frailty and cirrhosis from inception until 22 December 2023. The search method was conducted with a combination of keywords and Mesh terms: (“frailty” or “frail”) and (“liver cirrhosis,” “hepatic cirrhosis,” “liver fibrosis,” “cirrhosis,” or “cirrhotic”). In addition, we conducted a thorough manual examination of the reference lists of relevant primary and secondary research papers. The search strategy is demonstrated in Table S1 in .
Study Selection
The following were the inclusion criteria: (1) cohort studies revealed details about the frailty among patients with cirrhosis; (2) patients (18 years or above) diagnosed with cirrhosis; (3) frailty was assessed using a standardized and reliable instrument, such as the fried frailty score (FFS) and liver frailty index (LFI); (4) at least one clinical outcome between cirrhosis with and without frailty was reported during follow-up; and (5) publications were in English or Chinese.
The following were the exclusion criteria: (1) reviews, non-cohort studies, letters, and conference abstracts; (2) studies that did not provide complete data; (3) duplicated papers; (4) studies not reporting the prevalence of frailty or the predictive value of frailty on the outcomes of patients with cirrhosis; and (5) patients included other diseases rather than cirrhosis
Data Extraction
Author and publication year, country, study design, study population, sample size, age, follow-up (months), frailty instruments, and prevalence of frailty were extracted by two researchers working independently. For each study, the relative ratio (RR) and 95% CI were extracted, both with and without adjustment for confounding variables. Furthermore, from the studies that were incorporated, the true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN), and false negative (FN) values were extracted.
Quality Assessment
Two authors independently assessed the cohort studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) instrument []. It contained three components, including the study group selection, group comparability, and ascertainment of outcomes. The instrument had a maximum score of 9, with a score higher than 5 indicating high-quality literature []. If discrepancies existed, the corresponding author assisted in reaching a consensus.
Statistical Analysis
The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager (version 5.3) and R software (version 4.2.2; R Foundation for Statistical Computing).
For the purpose of estimating the effect size, the RR and 95% CI were used. The χ2 test was used to investigate heterogeneity among the outcomes of each study, and the I2 test was utilized to quantify the level of heterogeneity. The funnel plot was used to evaluate the publication bias when the number of publications reached or exceeded 10. When there were less than 10 publications, the Egger test was used to evaluate literature bias. Further investigation was conducted using the trim-and-fill method if the published literature was biased. Statistical significance was considered to be indicated by P values less than .05.
The average sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rate (FPR), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the included studies were computed using the random-effect model. Furthermore, the accuracy of the test and the consistency of the outcomes of the included studies were determined using the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve.
Ethical Considerations
All analyses were conducted using previously published studies, and therefore, ethics approval and patient consent were unnecessary. This review does not include human subject information, primary data collection, or any form of experimentation involving individuals.
Results
Selected Studies
Following the identification of 1790 articles during the preliminary search, 780 duplicate articles were eliminated. By reviewing titles and abstracts, an additional 926 sources were eliminated from consideration primarily owing to their lack of relevance to the meta-analysis. The remaining 84 studies were read completely. A total of 58 were deemed ineligible for the reasons outlined in 
Figure 1. Finally, 26 studies were considered in this analysis. The search flow of this study is presented in Figure 1; the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist has been shown as .
Characteristics of the Included Studies
As shown in 
Table 1, the meta-analysis comprised 26 cohort studies with 9597 patients with cirrhosis [,,,,-]. Among the 26 articles, 3 were retrospective studies [,,] and 23 were prospective studies [,,-,,]. They were published between 2013 and 2023, and performed in the USA [,,,,-,,,], Canada [,], Chile [], China [-,], Egypt [], Germany [,,], India [], the Netherlands [], Slovakia [], and Thailand []. Considering the included patients, 15 were patients with cirrhosis [,-,,-,-], 8 were patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants, 3 were patients who received liver transplants [,,], and the remaining 1 patient had cirrhosis after surgery []. Moreover, the number of patients included was between 88 and 9597. A variety of tools were used to diagnose frailty, including the short physical performance battery (SPPB) [,], Carolina frailty index (CFI) [,], fried frailty score (FFS) [,,], liver frailty index (LFI) [,,,-,-,], clinical frailty scale (CFS) [,], gait speed test (GST) [,,], and others [,,,,]. The mean follow-up durations varied between 1 and 60 months. The prevalence of frailty in patients with cirrhosis ranged from 10.50% to 75.40%. The NOS scores of the studies included in the study varied between 6 and 8, indicating a high level of quality in these studies. Table S2 in displays the evaluation criteria for literature quality.
| Author, year (citation) | Country | Study design | Study population | Sample size | Age, years | Follow-up (months) | Frailty tools | Prevalence of frailty | Quality assessment score |
| Behiry, 2018 [] | Egypt | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 145 | mean (SD), 60 (7) | 3 | SPPBa | - | 6 |
| Deng, 2020 [] | China | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 158 | mean (range), 64 (57-70) | 24 | CFIb | 14.56% | 8 |
| Dunn, 2016 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplant | 373 | mean (SD), 56.7 (10.1) | 3 | FFSc | - | 7 |
| Guo, 2022 [] | China | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 221 | mean (range), 63 (57–68) | 24 | LFId | 14.50% | 7 |
| Hui, 2022 [] | China | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 227 | mean (SD), 61.7 (9.9) | 48 | FIe | - | 7 |
| Hui, 2021 [] | China | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 105 | mean (SD), 61.6 (9.5) | - | CFIf | 6 | |
| Kaps, 2022 [] | Germany | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 88 | mean (range), 60 (51-67) | 1 | LFI | 51% | 8 |
| Kardashian, 2021 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 1405 | mean (range), 57 (49-63) | 12 | LFI | - | 7 |
| Klein, 2021 [] | Germany | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 114 | mean (range), 53 (42-60) | 48 | FFS | 75.40% | 6 |
| Kremer, 2020 [] | Germany | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 200 | mean (range), 60 (52‐66) | 24 | CFS | 10.50% | 7 |
| Lai, 2018 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 529 | mean (range), 58 (50‐63) | 24 | LFI | - | 6 |
| Lai, 2022 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 1166 | mean (range), 60 (53‐64) | 60 | LFI | 94% | 7 |
| Lin, 2022 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 116 | mean (SD), 56 (11) | 48 | LFI, 6MWTg, GSTh | 25% | 6 |
| Luo, 2023 [] | China | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 285 | mean (SD), 59.1 (12.3) | 36 | FFPi | 37.20% | 6 |
| Mahmud 2021 [] | USA | Retrospective | Patients with cirrhosis undergoing surgery | 804 | - | 36 | HFRSj | 48.50% | 6 |
| Nathiya 2023 [] | India | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 156 | mean (SD), 47.42 (13.47) | - | LFI | 44.92% | 7 |
| Salim 2020 [] | USA | Retrospective | Patients with cirrhosis who received liver transplants | 107 | mean (SD), 58 (11) | 1 | GST, CSTk | 37.80% | 7 |
| Serper 2021 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis who received liver transplants | 211 | mean (SD), 57 (12) | 8 | LFI | 59% | 8 |
| Siramolpiwat 2021 [] | Thailand | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 152 | mean (SD), 62.5 (9.3) | 18 | LFI | 24.30% | 8 |
| Skladany 2021 [] | Slovakia | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 168 | mean (SD), 57.9 (14.3) | 6 | LFI, CFS, FFS, SPPB | - | 7 |
| Soto 2021 [] | Chile | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 126 | mean (SD), 64 (8.3) | 48 | FFP | 65.10% | 7 |
| Tandon 2016 [] | Canada | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 300 | mean (SD), 57.4 (9.3) | 6 | CFS, FFCl, SPPB | 18% | 8 |
| Tapper 2015 [] | USA | Retrospective | Patients with cirrhosis who received liver transplants | 734 | mean (SD), 57.3 (11.5) | 3 | ADLm, BSn, MFSo | - | 6 |
| Tapper 2019 [] | USA | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis | 300 | mean (range), 60 (52‐66) | - | GST and CS | - | 8 |
| van Vugt 2017 [] | Netherlands | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 585 | mean (range), 56 (48‐62) | 3 | The MELD-Sarcopenia | 43.40% | 7 |
| Wang2021 [] | Canada | Prospective | Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 822 | mean (SD), 55.2 (9.9) | - | LFI | 24.40% | 6 |
aSPPB: short physical performance battery.
bCFI: Carolina frailty index.
cFFS: Fried frailty score.
dLFI: liver frailty index.
eFI: frailty index.
fCFS: clinical frailty scale.
g6MWT: 6-minute walk test.
hGST: gait speed test.
iFFP: fried frailty phenotype.
jHFRS: hospital frailty risk score.
kCST: chair stands test.
lFFC: fried frailty criteria.
mADL: activities of daily living.
nBS: Braden scale.
oMFS: Morse fall scale.
Meta-Analysis Results
Mortality
Seventeen studies reported the association between frailty and mortality in patients with cirrhosis [,,,-,,,,,,]. Pooled results using a fixed-effect model indicated a significant correlation between frailty and mortality (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.82‐2.34, P<.001, I2=14%; Figure 2A). A visual examination revealed that the funnel plot was symmetrical, suggesting a low probability of publishing bias (
Figure 2B). The crosshair plots displayed the sensitivity, FPR, and 95% CI of the included studies (
Figure 2C) [,,,,,,,,,]. The SROC curve with 95% CI and 95% prediction intervals of frailty in cirrhosis is shown in
Figure 2D. The FPR was 0.25 (95% CI 0.17-0.34), and the DOR was 4.17 (95% CI 2.93-5.93). The summary LR+ was 2.35 (95% CI 1.86-2.96) and the LR- was 0.56 (95% CI 0.45-0.71). As shown in
Figure 2E, frailty had a summary sensitivity of 0.54 (95% CI 0.39-0.69). The combined specificity of all studies was 0.73 (95% CI 0.64-0.81;
Figure 2F).
Additional subgroup analyses revealed that the frailty-assessment methods, sample size, and study population may not have substantially affected the results (Table 2).
| Groups | No of studies | I2 | RR | 95% CI | P value | |
| Assessment tool | ||||||
| CFIa | 3 | 0 | 2.51 | 1.81-3.48 | <.001 | |
| LFIb | 7 | 0 | 2.25 | 1.86-2.74 | <.001 | |
| SPPBc | 2 | 92 | 1.29 | 1.20-1.38 | <.001 | |
| FFSd | 2 | 0 | 1.71 | 1.41-2.08 | <.001 | |
| CFSe | 3 | 62 | 2.04 | 1.44-2.88 | <.001 | |
| Sample | ||||||
| ≥200 | 11 | 0 | 2.15 | 1.86-2.49 | <.001 | |
| <200 | 6 | 49 | 1.77 | 1.52-2.06 | <.001 | |
| Study population | ||||||
| Patients with cirrhosis | 9 | 48 | 2.13 | 1.76-2.58 | <.001 | |
| Patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplants | 5 | 0 | 2.05 | 1.70-2.48 | <.001 | |
| Patients with cirrhosis who received liver transplants | 2 | 0 | 2.01 | 1.29-3.15 | .002 | |
aCFI: Carolina frailty index.
bLFI: liver frailty index.
cSPPB: short physical performance battery.
dFFS: fried frailty score.
eCFS: clinical frailty scale.
Readmission
Figure 3A displays the inclusion of 5 studies in the pooled analysis investigating the relationship between frailty and readmission in patients with cirrhosis [,,,,]. The pooled results with a fixed-effect model (I2=12%, P=.33) indicated that patients with cirrhosis with frailty had an increased risk of readmission (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.22‐1.84, P<.001). The 5 included publications had a significant bias, according to the Egger test results (t=13.64, P<.001,
Figure 3B). Accordingly, we further conducted trim-and-fill analysis, and results showed that the effect size was 1.31 (95% CI 1.01-1.70, P=.042,
Figure 3C). This result showed that substantial relationships were unchanged when potential publication bias was taken into account.
Three studies provided descriptions of the TP, FP, FN, and TN [,,]. Accordingly, we conducted a diagnostic test accuracy for them. Crosshair plots were drawn to display the sensitivity (FPR and 95% CI of the 3 studies, as shown in Figure 3D). The SROC curve is shown in
Figure 3E, with the FPR of 0.39 (95% CI 0.17-0.66) and the DOR of 1.375 (95% CI 0.64-2.93). The summary LR+ was 1.200 (95% CI 0.74-1.94), and the LR- was 0.873 (95% CI 0.66-1.16). The combined sensitivity and specificity of all included studies were 0.46 (95% CI 0.28-0.64) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.28-0.85), as shown in
Figure 3F and G.
Quality of Life
Four studies examined the correlation between frailty and the quality of life (QoL) in patients with cirrhosis [,,,]. The pooled results of 4 studies with random-effect models indicated that frailty was significantly associated with decreased QoL in patients with cirrhosis (RR 5.78, 95% CI 2.25-14.82, P<.001, I2=95%, Figure 4A). Sensitivity analysis, which eliminated studies one by one, revealed that the results were consistent (RR 6.35, 95% CI 3.21‐12.57, P<.01,
Figure 4B). The results of the Egger test indicated no obvious bias in the included 4 articles (t=3.08, P=.091,
Figure 4C).
Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive analyses were carried out because the following results were given in only 2 or fewer studies. Frailty was associated with non-home charge [,], prolonged hospital days [,], decompensation [,], sleep disturbance [], prolonged posttransplant intensive care unit days [], aspiration [], and extended intubation days [].
Discussion
Principal Results and Comparison With Previous Works
In this meta-analysis, our main findings demonstrated that patients with cirrhosis with frailty had a significantly higher risk of mortality, higher readmission, and lower QoL than those without frailty. According to our evaluation of the literature, the current study provided the most thorough evidence that frailty was a predictor of unfavorable clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis.
In this study, the prevalence of frailty in patients with cirrhosis ranged from 10.50% to 75.40%, depending on the specific techniques used to diagnose frailty, the characteristics of the study participants, and the operational definitions used. For example, the study conducted by Lai used the LFI to evaluate frailty in patients with cirrhosis and found that it has a prevalence rate of 94% [], while another study used the CFI to assess frailty, and results show that the prevalence is only 14.56% []. Sensitivity and specificity are influenced by the assessment instrument and the chosen threshold []. When selecting frailty-assessment tools for patients with cirrhosis, understanding the content of existing frailty-assessment tools and the suitable population is critical to choosing the most appropriate frailty-screening tool. Furthermore, the instrument most frequently reported in this research was the LFI, a specialized tool designed to evaluate the frailty of liver disease. Other assessment tools included the SPPB, CFI, FFS, CFS, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Each of these tool tests is a performance-based measure that necessitates active patient participation, restricting their applicability in patients with severe or acute decompensation []. At present, researchers still debate about which evaluation tool for cirrhosis faltering is the standard, and a significant number of relevant studies are required to confirm it in the future.
This meta-analysis demonstrated that frailty was more likely linked to poor survival in patients with cirrhosis, consistent with previous studies []. Subgroup analysis further revealed that frailty-assessment tools, sample size, and study subject characteristics may not significantly influence the association between frailty and mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Previous research has shown that patients with cirrhosis with frailty had a considerably worse prognosis than those without frailty, showing that frailty is a poor prognostic factor for chronic liver disease [,]. The mechanisms of frailty leading to poor prognosis in patients with cirrhosis include the upregulation of the inflammatory response, impaired immune function, low testosterone levels, intestinal flora disorder, decreased intestinal barrier function, and potential neuromuscular weakness [-]. For example, testosterone has been proven to be associated with frailty [,]. It is necessary to maintain physiological homeostasis, and its deficiency may decrease muscle strength, increasing the risk of falls, disability, and complications from acute illnesses []. In addition, the mechanisms involved in the relationship between frailty and unfavorable outcomes may increase susceptibility to complications, such as inflammatory insults [], infection [], and hepatic encephalopathy [,] in patients with cirrhosis, thereby affecting the survival of patients. However, the mechanism of action between frailty and cirrhosis prognosis is bidirectional, meaning that liver decompensation reimbursement increases the risk of frailty development []. Additionally, this study demonstrated that the probability of compensation in frail patients with cirrhosis was 2.55 times greater than that in non-frail patients. Specifically, only a limited number of studies have assessed the association between frailty and decompensation in patients with cirrhosis, and further investigation is necessary to delve into this association in the future.
This study’s findings suggested that patients with cirrhosis with frailty were more prone to have the risk of readmission than non-frail patients, as confirmed in other populations, including cancer patients [,], patients with chronic disease [,], and surgical patients [,]. A recent study conducted by Witt et al to evaluate the predictive value of frailty in 80 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has demonstrated that they have a higher risk of readmission than patients without frailty (OR 19.31, 95% CI 1.07‐349.03) []. This result may be explained by reduced physiological reserve, malnutrition, and impaired immune function in debilitated patients with cirrhosis [,]. For example, frail patients with reduced physiological reserve are more prone to complications and increased risk of infection when encountering stressors, which in turn increases the likelihood of patient readmission [].
Our study provided some evidence of a correlation between frailty and diminished QoL among patients with cirrhosis. Frailty in patients with chronic liver disease is a multidimensional syndrome []. Frailty is characterized by the gradual decline of various physiological systems, such as the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal systems, which affects the patient’s daily activities and self-care ability and may increase the risk of death and hospitalization, thereby decreasing the QoL [,]. Two recent systematic reviews have shown a clear relationship between frailty, anxiety, and depression, which showed that frailty may lead to lower QoL levels by causing negative psychological effects [,]. Although this study found a significant decline in the QoL of patients with frailty due to the high heterogeneity, future larger and well-designed studies are needed to explore the relationship between frailty and QoL in patients with cirrhosis.
Recommendations for Future Practice
An essential aspect of this study is to make health care professionals aware of the importance of frailty as one of the risk predictors of cirrhosis prognosis. Standardized assessment tools, such as the CFI and LFI, can identify the patients’ frailty status as early as possible to provide timely intervention. In addition, clinical staff can include frailty in the prognosis management plan of patients. In the meantime, personalized management measures can be formulated for patients with cirrhosis with different degrees of frailty, which can significantly improve the prognosis of patients. In addition, health care professionals should strengthen the positive management and follow-up of patients with cirrhosis, especially those with a higher degree of frailty, determine the abnormal situation of patients with cirrhosis in time, adjust the management plan, and ultimately improve the prognosis of patients.
Implications for Future Research
This systematic review has important implications for future studies. If frailty is regarded as an important part of the routine assessment of patients with cirrhosis, researchers need to further compare the prognostic value of different frailty indicators in patients with cirrhosis and reach a consensus on the assessment tools for frailty in patients with cirrhosis. In addition, we suggest that future studies should target the protective factors of frailty to inform preventive strategies for patients with cirrhosis. In addition, researchers and policy makers should develop comprehensive treatment approaches and strengthen interdisciplinary collaboration to provide better management strategies for frailty in patients with cirrhosis.
Strength and Limitations
This was the first systematic review to examine the predictive value of unfavorable outcomes of frailty in patients with cirrhosis. We established that frailty was a good prognostic factor of the clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis, including mortality, readmission, and decreased QoL. A systematic review by Bowers et al revealed that several frailty assessments can reliably assess mortality in patients with cirrhosis who are ineligible for transplantation []. Future investigations should explore the trajectory of frailty change and its effect on outcomes across time. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis on the longitudinal patterns of frailty and their association with outcome measures.
This study had a few limitations. First, we included only literature reported in Chinese and English, which may have left out some relevant studies in other languages. Second, our study had an inadequate sample size, necessitating higher sample sizes in future research to evaluate the correlation between frailty and outcome in patients with cirrhosis. Furthermore, variations existed across the studies in the tools used to evaluate frailty, which may have influenced the outcomes.
Conclusion
The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate a significant correlation between frailty and an unfavorable clinical outcome in patients with cirrhosis, specifically in terms of mortality and readmission. Future research should be conducted to further explore the most effective screening tools for diagnosing frailty in patients with cirrhosis, as well as whether frailty-related interventions were connected with better clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank all the patients and institutions for participating in the study. This study was supported by Guangxi medical and health appropriate technology development and application project (No. S2023064), Self-raised project of Guangxi Health Commission (Z-A20220499), and Self-established Cultivation Project of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University - Nursing Clinical Research Climbing Plan (No. YYZS2022011).
Data Availability
The data in this study have been presented in the manuscript or uploaded as supplementary materials.
Authors' Contributions
W-ZT conceived the study, data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. W-ZT and S-TM participated in the literature search, data extraction, methodological quality assessment. Y-XX contributed to the data analysis. Y-JT and KJ commented on the final manuscript. Y-XX, and Z-K-KT contributed to the literature search and data extraction. WZ-T and S-RZ contributed to manuscript revision. All authors have checked manuscripts and approved the publication of the protocol. In addition,
Author Y-JT is the co-corresponding author of this paper and can be reached at: Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China; Email address: 83864627@qq.com.
Conflicts of Interest
None declared.
Multimedia Appendix 1
The search strategy and quality assessment of the included studies.
PDF File, 183 KBReferences
- Ginès P, Krag A, Abraldes JG, Solà E, Fabrellas N, Kamath PS. Liver cirrhosis. Lancet. Oct 9, 2021;398(10308):1359-1376. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Hussain Y, Bannaga A, Fisher N, et al. The fatty liver, cirrhosis, and liver cancer study (TENDENCY): protocol for a multicenter case-control study. JMIR Res Protoc. May 31, 2023;12:e44264. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Smith A, Baumgartner K, Bositis C. Cirrhosis: diagnosis and management. Am Fam Physician. Dec 15, 2019;100(12):759-770. [Medline]
- Asrani SK, Devarbhavi H, Eaton J, Kamath PS. Burden of liver diseases in the world. J Hepatol. Jan 2019;70(1):151-171. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Wynn TA. Fibrotic disease and the T(H)1/T(H)2 paradigm. Nat Rev Immunol. Aug 2004;4(8):583-594. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Berry K, Duarte-Rojo A, Grab JD, et al. Cognitive impairment and physical frailty in patients with cirrhosis. Hepatol Commun. Jan 2022;6(1):237-246. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. Mar 2001;56(3):M146-M156. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Ruiz J, Miller AA, Tooze JA, et al. Frailty assessment predicts toxicity during first cycle chemotherapy for advanced lung cancer regardless of chronologic age. J Geriatr Oncol. Jan 2019;10(1):48-54. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Fairhall N, Aggar C, Kurrle SE, et al. Frailty intervention trial (FIT). BMC Geriatr. Oct 13, 2008;8:27. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Cao X, Li X, Zhang J, et al. Associations between frailty and the increased risk of adverse outcomes among 38,950 UK biobank participants with prediabetes: prospective cohort study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. May 18, 2023;9:e45502. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Liu Y, Huang L, Hu F, Zhang X. Investigating frailty, polypharmacy, malnutrition, chronic conditions, and quality of life in older adults: large population-based study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. Oct 11, 2024;10:e50617. URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/50617 [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Essam Behiry M, Mogawer S, Yamany A, et al. Ability of the short physical performance battery frailty index to predict mortality and hospital readmission in patients with liver cirrhosis. Int J Hepatol. 2019;2019:8092865. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Salim TI, Nestlerode LC, Lucatorto EL, et al. Frailty as tested by gait speed is a risk factor for liver transplant respiratory complications. Am J Gastroenterol. Jun 2020;115(6):859-866. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Wang S, Xu CQ, Whitlock R, et al. Su347 frailty increases the risk of cirrhosis disease progression, death and hospitalization in cirrhosis. Gastroenterology. May 2021;160(6):S-857. URL: https://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&id=L2011987730&from=export [CrossRef]
- Dunn MA, Josbeno DA, Tevar AD, et al. Frailty as tested by gait speed is an independent risk factor for cirrhosis complications that require hospitalization. Am J Gastroenterol. Dec 2016;111(12):1768-1775. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Xu CQ, Mohamad Y, Kappus MR, et al. The relationship between frailty and cirrhosis etiology: From the Functional Assessment in Liver Transplantation (FrAILT) Study. Liver Int. Oct 2021;41(10):2467-2473. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Lai JC, Covinsky KE, Dodge JL, et al. Development of a novel frailty index to predict mortality in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology. Aug 2017;66(2):564-574. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Mahmud N, Kaplan DE, Taddei TH, Goldberg DS. Frailty is a risk factor for postoperative mortality in patients with cirrhosis undergoing diverse major surgeries. Liver Transpl. May 2021;27(5):699-710. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Yuan C, Li W, Liu J, Li J. Frailty and transplant-free survival of patients with liver cirrhosis: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(5):e0302836. URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302836 [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Hartling L, Milne A, Hamm MP, et al. Testing the Newcastle Ottawa Scale showed low reliability between individual reviewers. J Clin Epidemiol. Sep 2013;66(9):982-993. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435613000899 [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. Sep 2010;25(9):603-605. URL: https://www.sci-hub.se/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Deng Y, Lin L, Hou L, et al. A self-reported Frailty Index predicts long-term mortality in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Ann Transl Med. Oct 2020;8(19):1217. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Guo G, Li C, Hui Y, et al. Sarcopenia and frailty combined increases the risk of mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. 2022;13:20406223221109651. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Hui Y, Li N, Yu Z, et al. Health-related quality of life and its contributors according to a preference-based generic instrument in cirrhosis. Hepatol Commun. Mar 2022;6(3):610-620. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Hui Y, Xu L, Wang X, et al. Association between sleep disturbance and multidimensional frailty assessed by Frailty Index in hospitalized cirrhosis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. Dec 1, 2021;33(1S Suppl 1):e727-e733. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Kaps L, Lukac L, Michel M, et al. Liver frailty index for prediction of short-term rehospitalization in patients with liver cirrhosis. Diagnostics (Basel). Apr 24, 2022;12(5):1069. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Kardashian A, Ge J, McCulloch CE, et al. Identifying an optimal liver frailty index cutoff to predict waitlist mortality in liver transplant candidates. Hepatology. Mar 2021;73(3):1132-1139. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Klein CG, Malamutmann E, Latuske J, et al. Frailty as a predictive factor for survival after liver transplantation, especially for patients with MELD≤15-a prospective study. Langenbecks Arch Surg. Sep 2021;406(6):1963-1969. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Kremer WM, Nagel M, Reuter M, et al. Validation of the clinical frailty scale for the prediction of mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. Jul 2020;11(7):e00211. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Lai JC, Covinsky KE, McCulloch CE, Feng S. The liver frailty index improves mortality prediction of the subjective clinician assessment in patients with cirrhosis. Am J Gastroenterol. Feb 2018;113(2):235-242. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Lai JC, Ganger DR, Volk ML, et al. Association of frailty and sex with wait list mortality in liver transplant candidates in the multicenter functional assessment in liver transplantation (FrAILT) study. JAMA Surg. Mar 1, 2021;156(3):256-262. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Lin FP, Bloomer PM, Grubbs RK, et al. Low daily step count is associated with a high risk of hospital admission and death in community-dwelling patients with cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. Aug 2022;20(8):1813-1820. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Luo J, Yang D, Xu Z, et al. A prospective study on the differential association of sarcopenia and frailty with health outcomes in cirrhotic patients. Dig Liver Dis. Nov 2023;55(11):1533-1542. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Nathiya D, Raj P, Singh P, et al. Frailty predicting health-related quality of life trajectories in individuals with sarcopenia in liver cirrhosis: finding from BCAAS study. J Clin Med. Aug 17, 2023;12(16):5348. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Serper M, Tao SY, Kent DS, et al. Inpatient frailty assessment is feasible and predicts nonhome discharge and mortality in decompensated cirrhosis. Liver Transpl. Dec 2021;27(12):1711-1722. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Siramolpiwat S, Kiattikunrat K, Soontararatpong R, et al. Frailty as tested by the liver frailty index is associated with decompensation and unplanned hospitalization in patients with compensated cirrhosis. Scand J Gastroenterol. Oct 2021;56(10):1210-1219. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Skladany L, Drotarova Z, Vnencakova J, Jancekova D, Molcan P, Koller T. Applicability and prognostic value of frailty assessment tools among hospitalized patients with advanced chronic liver disease. Croat Med J. Feb 28, 2021;62(1):8-16. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Soto R, Díaz LA, Rivas V, et al. Frailty and reduced gait speed are independently related to mortality of cirrhotic patients in long-term follow-up. Ann Hepatol. 2021;25:100327. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tandon P, Tangri N, Thomas L, et al. A rapid bedside screen to predict unplanned hospitalization and death in outpatients with cirrhosis: a prospective evaluation of the clinical frailty scale. Am J Gastroenterol. Dec 2016;111(12):1759-1767. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tapper EB, Baki J, Parikh ND, Lok AS. Frailty, psychoactive medications, and cognitive dysfunction are associated with poor patient‐reported outcomes in cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2019;69(4):1676-1685. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tapper EB, Finkelstein D, Mittleman MA, Piatkowski G, Lai M. Standard assessments of frailty are validated predictors of mortality in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology. Aug 2015;62(2):584-590. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- van Vugt JLA, Alferink LJM, Buettner S, et al. A model including sarcopenia surpasses the MELD score in predicting waiting list mortality in cirrhotic liver transplant candidates: a competing risk analysis in a national cohort. J Hepatol. Apr 2018;68(4):707-714. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Wang S, Whitlock R, Xu C, et al. Frailty is associated with increased risk of cirrhosis disease progression and death. Hepatology. Mar 2022;75(3):600-609. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Mathoulin-Pélissier S, Bellera C, Rainfray M, Soubeyran P. Screening methods for geriatric frailty. Lancet Oncol. Jan 2013;14(1):e1-e2. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tandon P, Montano-Loza AJ, Lai JC, Dasarathy S, Merli M. Sarcopenia and frailty in decompensated cirrhosis. J Hepatol. Jul 2021;75 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S147-S162. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Nishikawa H, Shiraki M, Hiramatsu A, Moriya K, Hino K, Nishiguchi S. Japan Society of Hepatology guidelines for sarcopenia in liver disease (1st edition): recommendation from the working group for creation of sarcopenia assessment criteria. Hepatol Res. Sep 2016;46(10):951-963. URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/hepr.12774 [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tranah TH, Ballester MP, Carbonell-Asins JA, et al. Plasma ammonia levels predict hospitalisation with liver-related complications and mortality in clinically stable outpatients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol. Dec 2022;77(6):1554-1563. URL: https://www.journal-of-hepatology.eu/article/S0168-8278(22)02947-6/fulltext [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Montano-Loza AJ, Duarte-Rojo A, Meza-Junco J, et al. Inclusion of sarcopenia within MELD (MELD-sarcopenia) and the prediction of mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. Jul 16, 2015;6(7):e102. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Xue QL. The frailty syndrome: definition and natural history. Clin Geriatr Med. Feb 2011;27(1):1-15. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tandon P, Zanetto A, Piano S, Heimbach JK, Dasarathy S. Liver transplantation in the patient with physical frailty. J Hepatol. Jun 2023;78(6):1105-1117. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Cerdá B, Pérez M, Pérez-Santiago JD, Tornero-Aguilera JF, González-Soltero R, Larrosa M. Gut microbiota modification: another piece in the puzzle of the benefits of physical exercise in health? Front Physiol. 2016;7:51. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Morley JE, von Haehling S, Anker SD, Vellas B. From sarcopenia to frailty: a road less traveled. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. Mar 2014;5(1):5-8. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Chiang JM, Kaysen GA, Segal M, Chertow GM, Delgado C, Johansen KL. Low testosterone is associated with frailty, muscle wasting and physical dysfunction among men receiving hemodialysis: a longitudinal analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. May 1, 2019;34(5):802-810. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Saad F, Röhrig G, von Haehling S, Traish A. Testosterone deficiency and testosterone treatment in older men. Gerontology. 2017;63(2):144-156. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Muscedere J, Waters B, Varambally A, et al. The impact of frailty on intensive care unit outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. Aug 2017;43(8):1105-1122. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Krell RW, Kaul DR, Martin AR, et al. Association between sarcopenia and the risk of serious infection among adults undergoing liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. Dec 2013;19(12):1396-1402. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Bhanji RA, Moctezuma-Velazquez C, Duarte-Rojo A, et al. Myosteatosis and sarcopenia are associated with hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis. Hepatol Int. Jul 2018;12(4):377-386. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Voora RS, Qian AS, Kotha NV, et al. Frailty index as a predictor of readmission in patients with head and neck cancer. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. Jul 2022;167(1):89-96. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Choe YR, Joh JY, Kim YP. Association between frailty and readmission within one year after gastrectomy in older patients with gastric cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. May 2017;8(3):185-189. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Faye AS, Wen T, Soroush A, et al. Increasing prevalence of frailty and its association with readmission and mortality among hospitalized patients with IBD. Dig Dis Sci. Dec 2021;66(12):4178-4190. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Keeney T, Jette DU, Cabral H, Jette AM. Frailty and function in heart failure: predictors of 30-day hospital readmission? J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2021;44(2):101-107. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Panayi AC, Orkaby AR, Sakthivel D, et al. Impact of frailty on outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. Aug 2019;218(2):393-400. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Lakra A, Tram MK, Bernasek TL, Lyons ST, O’Connor CM. Frailty is associated with increased complication, readmission, and hospitalization costs following primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. Jul 2023;38(7 Suppl 2):S182-S186. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Witt LJ, Spacht WA, Carey KA, et al. Weak handgrip at index admission for acute exacerbation of COPD predicts all-cause 30-day readmission. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8:611989. URL: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.611989/full [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Wong RJ, Mohamad Y, Srisengfa YT, et al. Psychological contributors to the frail phenotype: the association between resilience and frailty in patients with cirrhosis. Am J Transplant. Jan 2021;21(1):241-246. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Lambrechts MJ, Tran K, Conaway W, et al. Modified frailty index as a predictor of postoperative complications and patient-reported outcomes after posterior cervical decompression and fusion. Asian Spine J. Apr 2023;17(2):313-321. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Soysal P, Veronese N, Thompson T, et al. Relationship between depression and frailty in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ageing Res Rev. Jul 2017;36:78-87. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Tan M, Bhanu C, Frost R. The association between frailty and anxiety: a systematic review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. May 2023;38(5):e5918. [CrossRef] [Medline]
- Bowers SP, Brennan PN, Dillon JF. Systematic review: the role of frailty in advanced chronic liver disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. Feb 2023;57(3):280-289. [CrossRef] [Medline]
Abbreviations
| 6MWT: 6-minute walk test |
| CFI: Carolina frailty index |
| CFS: clinical frailty scale |
| DOR: diagnostic odds ratio |
| FFS: fried frailty score |
| FN: false negative |
| FP: false positive |
| FPR: false-positive rate |
| GST: gait speed test |
| LFI: liver frailty index |
| LR: likelihood ratio |
| NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale |
| PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses |
| QoL: quality of life |
| RR: relative ratio |
| SPPB: short physical performance battery |
| SROC: summary receiver operating characteristic |
| TN: true negative |
| TP: true positive |
Edited by Christian Lovis; submitted 18.05.24; peer-reviewed by Xinyi Xu; final revised version received 31.12.24; accepted 12.01.25; published 27.02.25.
Copyright© Wen-Zhen Tang, Sheng-Rui Zhu, Shu-Tian Mo, Yuan-Xi Xie, Zheng-Ke-Ke Tan, Yan-Juan Teng, Kui Jia. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (https://medinform.jmir.org), 27.2.2025.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Informatics, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://medinform.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.