Cargando…

Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review

By the sixth decade of life, nearly one quarter of the population has substantial muscle atrophy, or sarcopenia. Despite the creation of a standardized definition of sarcopenia by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, variability may exist in the diagnostic criteria utilized for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Han, Alex, Bokshan, Steven L., Marcaccio, Stephen E., DePasse, J. Mason, Daniels, Alan H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29642478
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm7040070
_version_ 1783317837202325504
author Han, Alex
Bokshan, Steven L.
Marcaccio, Stephen E.
DePasse, J. Mason
Daniels, Alan H.
author_facet Han, Alex
Bokshan, Steven L.
Marcaccio, Stephen E.
DePasse, J. Mason
Daniels, Alan H.
author_sort Han, Alex
collection PubMed
description By the sixth decade of life, nearly one quarter of the population has substantial muscle atrophy, or sarcopenia. Despite the creation of a standardized definition of sarcopenia by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, variability may exist in the diagnostic criteria utilized for clinical sarcopenia research. The primary objectives of this review were to characterize diagnostic criteria used for measurement of sarcopenia in original studies, and to describe associations between sarcopenia and important clinical outcomes. We performed a literature review of the term “sarcopenia” in PubMed. Inclusion criteria were English language, original data, a clear and specific definition for diagnosing sarcopenia, and the analysis of sarcopenia’s effect on a clinical outcome. A total of 283 studies met inclusion criteria. More than half of the included sarcopenia investigations were level IV studies (54.1%), while 43.1% provided level II evidence. Under one third (27.6%) of studies examined sarcopenia with regard to surgical outcomes. In terms of diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia, 264 (93.3%) studies used measures of skeletal muscle mass, with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) being the most common modality (43.6%). Sarcopenia was found to be a consistent predictor of chronic disease progression, all-cause mortality, poorer functional outcomes, and postoperative complications. In conclusion, there is substantial evidence that sarcopenia impacts both medical and surgical outcomes. However, current research has utilized heterogeneous diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia. Further efforts to standardize the modalities used to diagnose sarcopenia in clinical research and practice will help strengthen our ability to study this important phenomenon.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5920444
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59204442018-04-30 Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review Han, Alex Bokshan, Steven L. Marcaccio, Stephen E. DePasse, J. Mason Daniels, Alan H. J Clin Med Review By the sixth decade of life, nearly one quarter of the population has substantial muscle atrophy, or sarcopenia. Despite the creation of a standardized definition of sarcopenia by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, variability may exist in the diagnostic criteria utilized for clinical sarcopenia research. The primary objectives of this review were to characterize diagnostic criteria used for measurement of sarcopenia in original studies, and to describe associations between sarcopenia and important clinical outcomes. We performed a literature review of the term “sarcopenia” in PubMed. Inclusion criteria were English language, original data, a clear and specific definition for diagnosing sarcopenia, and the analysis of sarcopenia’s effect on a clinical outcome. A total of 283 studies met inclusion criteria. More than half of the included sarcopenia investigations were level IV studies (54.1%), while 43.1% provided level II evidence. Under one third (27.6%) of studies examined sarcopenia with regard to surgical outcomes. In terms of diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia, 264 (93.3%) studies used measures of skeletal muscle mass, with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) being the most common modality (43.6%). Sarcopenia was found to be a consistent predictor of chronic disease progression, all-cause mortality, poorer functional outcomes, and postoperative complications. In conclusion, there is substantial evidence that sarcopenia impacts both medical and surgical outcomes. However, current research has utilized heterogeneous diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia. Further efforts to standardize the modalities used to diagnose sarcopenia in clinical research and practice will help strengthen our ability to study this important phenomenon. MDPI 2018-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5920444/ /pubmed/29642478 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm7040070 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Han, Alex
Bokshan, Steven L.
Marcaccio, Stephen E.
DePasse, J. Mason
Daniels, Alan H.
Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review
title Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review
title_full Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review
title_fullStr Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review
title_short Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Outcomes in Sarcopenia Research: A Literature Review
title_sort diagnostic criteria and clinical outcomes in sarcopenia research: a literature review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29642478
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm7040070
work_keys_str_mv AT hanalex diagnosticcriteriaandclinicaloutcomesinsarcopeniaresearchaliteraturereview
AT bokshanstevenl diagnosticcriteriaandclinicaloutcomesinsarcopeniaresearchaliteraturereview
AT marcacciostephene diagnosticcriteriaandclinicaloutcomesinsarcopeniaresearchaliteraturereview
AT depassejmason diagnosticcriteriaandclinicaloutcomesinsarcopeniaresearchaliteraturereview
AT danielsalanh diagnosticcriteriaandclinicaloutcomesinsarcopeniaresearchaliteraturereview