Frailty and heart failure: State‐of‐the‐art review

• Published in: Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle Vol. 14; no. 5; pp. 1959 - 1972
• Main Authors: Talha, Khawaja M., Pandey, Ambarish, Fudim, Marat, Butler, Javed, Anker, Stefan D., Khan, Muhammad Shahzeb
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Heidelberg John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01-10-2023; John Wiley and Sons Inc; Wiley
• Subjects: cardiac rehabilitation; Cardiovascular disease; Clinical trials; Ejection fraction; Frailty; Genotype & phenotype; Heart failure; Hospitalization; medical therapy; Morbidity; Mortality; Older people; Patients; Physiology; Population; prognosis; Rehabilitation; Review; Reviews
• ISSN: 2190-5991; 2190-6009
• DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.13306

Abstract
At least half of all patients with heart failure (HF) are affected by frailty, a syndrome that limits an individual ability to recover from acute stressors. While frailty affects up to 90% of patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction, it is also seen in ~30–60% of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, with ~26% higher prevalence in women compared with men. The relationship between frailty and HF is bidirectional, with both conditions exacerbating the other. Frailty is further complicated by a higher prevalence of sarcopenia (by ~20%) in HF patients compared with patients without HF, which negatively affects outcomes. Several frailty assessment methods have been employed historically including the Fried frailty phenotype and Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale to classify HF patients based on the severity of frailty; however, a validated HF‐specific frailty assessment tool does not currently exist. Frailty in HF is associated with a poor prognosis with a 1.5‐fold to 2‐fold higher risk of all‐cause death and hospitalizations compared to non‐frail patients. Frailty is also highly prevalent in patients with worsening HF, affecting >50% of patients hospitalized for HF. Such patients with multiple readmissions for decompensated HF have markedly poor outcomes compared to younger, non‐frail cohorts, and it is hypothesized that it may be due to major physical and functional limitations that limit recovery from an acute episode of worsening HF, a care aspect that has not been addressed in HF guidelines. Frail patients are thought to confer less benefit from therapeutic interventions due to an increased risk of perceived harm, resulting in lower adherence to HF interventions, which may worsen outcomes. Multiple studies report that <40% of frail patients are on guideline‐directed medical therapy for HF, of which most are on suboptimal doses of these medications. There is a lack of evidence generated from randomized trials in this incredibly vulnerable population, and most current practice is governed by post hoc analyses of trials, observational registry‐based data and providers' clinical judgement. The current body of evidence suggests that the treatment effect of most guideline‐based interventions, including medications, cardiac rehabilitation and device therapy, is consistent across all age groups and frailty subgroups and, in some cases, may be amplified in the older, more frail population. In this review, we discuss the characteristics, assessment tools, impact on prognosis and impact on therapeutic interventions of frailty in patients with HF.