Is There an Ideal Method of Predicting Postoperative Complications Following Major Head and Neck Procedures?: A Comparative Analysis of Three Frailty Indices

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a critical determinant of surgical outcomes in head and neck surgery, given that patients often present with multiple comorbidities. Identifying the optimal frailty index for preoperative risk stratification can enhance perioperative management and postoperative outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare the predictive accuracy of the modified frailty index-5 (mFI-5), the risk analysis index for administrative data (RAI-A), and the revised risk analysis index (RAI-Rev) in forecasting postoperative complications and nonhome discharge following soft tissue free-flap reconstruction, total laryngectomy (TL), and parotidectomy. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study querying a multicenter, national surgical database (ACS-NSQIP) from 2015 to 2020 for patients aged 18 or older who underwent soft tissue reconstruction of the head and neck, TL, or parotidectomy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models assessed predictive value, with discriminative ability evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3633 soft tissue free flaps, 1115 TL, and 10 678 parotidectomy patients were identified. The mFI-5 most reliably stratified patients into predictive frailty tiers, showing strong associations with major complications and Clavien-Dindo Grade IV events, particularly in the free flap (OR = 4.06, AUC = 0.62) and TL cohorts (OR = 7.23). The RAI-A "severely frail" group demonstrated the highest specificity for nonhome discharge across all procedures, especially in the free flap (OR = 10.75) and parotidectomy (OR = 83.81) cohorts. RAI-Rev outperformed both mFI-5 and RAI-A in predicting mortality following TL (AUC = 0.76, p = 0.029) and showed superior AUCs for mortality (0.84) and reoperation (0.64) in parotidectomy. All indices demonstrated their strongest overall performance in the parotidectomy cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The frailty indices varied in predictive utility by procedure and outcome. RAI-A and RAI-Rev offered greater granularity, with both indices excelling in nonhome discharge prediction and the RAI-Rev demonstrating superior sensitivity for rare outcomes like mortality. The predictive strength of each index was best within the context of parotidectomy, suggesting particular value in ambulatory settings. Index selection should be tailored to the surgical context and the specific complication of interest.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Head & Neck
Published
2026-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.70249
Primary Topic
Frailty in Older Adults
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Is There an Ideal Method of Predicting Postoperative Complications Following Major Head and Neck Procedures?: A Comparative Analysis of Three Frailty Indices

Diana S. Shaari, Michael Saturno, Raymond Liu Chai, Christopher Connors et al.
Head & Neck
Frailty in Older Adults
article

Is There an Ideal Method of Predicting Postoperative Complications Following Major Head and Neck Procedures?: A Comparative Analysis of Three Frailty Indices

Diana S. Shaari, Michael Saturno, Raymond Liu Chai, Christopher Connors, Rahul Guda, Olivia First
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a critical determinant of surgical outcomes in head and neck surgery, given that patients often present with multiple comorbidities. Identifying the optimal frailty index for preoperative risk stratification can enhance perioperative management and postoperative outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare the predictive accuracy of the modified frailty index-5 (mFI-5), the risk analysis index for administrative data (RAI-A), and the revised risk analysis index (RAI-Rev) in forecasting postoperative complications and nonhome discharge following soft tissue free-flap reconstruction, total laryngectomy (TL), and parotidectomy. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study querying a multicenter, national surgical database (ACS-NSQIP) from 2015 to 2020 for patients aged 18 or older who underwent soft tissue reconstruction of the head and neck, TL, or parotidectomy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models assessed predictive value, with discriminative ability evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3633 soft tissue free flaps, 1115 TL, and 10 678 parotidectomy patients were identified. The mFI-5 most reliably stratified patients into predictive frailty tiers, showing strong associations with major complications and Clavien-Dindo Grade IV events, particularly in the free flap (OR = 4.06, AUC = 0.62) and TL cohorts (OR = 7.23). The RAI-A "severely frail" group demonstrated the highest specificity for nonhome discharge across all procedures, especially in the free flap (OR = 10.75) and parotidectomy (OR = 83.81) cohorts. RAI-Rev outperformed both mFI-5 and RAI-A in predicting mortality following TL (AUC = 0.76, p = 0.029) and showed superior AUCs for mortality (0.84) and reoperation (0.64) in parotidectomy. All indices demonstrated their strongest overall performance in the parotidectomy cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The frailty indices varied in predictive utility by procedure and outcome. RAI-A and RAI-Rev offered greater granularity, with both indices excelling in nonhome discharge prediction and the RAI-Rev demonstrating superior sensitivity for rare outcomes like mortality. The predictive strength of each index was best within the context of parotidectomy, suggesting particular value in ambulatory settings. Index selection should be tailored to the surgical context and the specific complication of interest.

Head & Neck
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Frailty in Older Adults
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.