SAT-LB018 Different Definitions of Sarcopenia and Its Correlations with Anthropometric Measurements, Body Composition, Handgrip Strength, Metabolic Profile and Bone Mineral Density in Obese Women

BACKGROUND: The concept of sarcopenic obesity hasn’t been fully elucidated, due to the different muscle mass indexes (MMIs) as a dilemma in its definition. There are few trials about MMIs related to the clinical outcomes in young adults with severe obesity. OBJECTIVE: To correlate 3 MMIs, used in the diagnosis of sarcopenia, with age, anthropometric measures, body composition, handgrip strength (HS), metabolic profile and bone mineral density (BMD) in obese women preceding bariatric surgery (BS). METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 62 obese women of a public hospital in Brazil. Body composition was given by bio-impedance (inbody-370), multifrequency (5, 50, 250Hz) with 12 hours fasting, and BMD by Lunar Densitometer Prodigy Advance. The following MMIs were studied: height(2)-adjusted appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASMM): ASMM/ht(2) (Kg/m(2)); weight-adjusted ASMM: ASMM/weight x100 (%) and BMI-adjusted ASMM: ASMM/BMI (m(2)). The HS (dominant) was evaluated by Jamar Dynamometer (3 measurements; 30 sec interval). Metabolic profile included: Fasting glucose, HbA1c, HOMA-IR, insulin, lipid profile and hs-CRP. RESULTS: Patients were 39±8,99 years old; weight 108.6±13.8 Kg; BMI 42.6±4.6 kg/m(2); ASMM/wt 19.76±1.87%; ASMM/BMI 0.505±0.080 m(2); ASMM/ht(2) 8.46±1.00 Kg/m(2) and body fat percentage (BFP) 51.8±3.32%. None of the MMIs were associated with age. Concerning anthropometric measures, only the ASMM/ht(2) was correlated with wt (r=0.701 p<0.001), otherwise all MMIs were associated with ht (had p<0.05). ASMM/wt x100 and ASMM/BMI had negative and significant association with BMI, while ASMM-ht was positively associated with BMI (r=0.597 p<0.001). Regarding body composition, ASMM/wt and ASMM/BMI had negative correlation with BFP (r=-0.769 p<0.001; r=-0.669 p<0.001), respectively. All MMIs correlated positively and significantly with skeletal muscle mass. ASMM/ht2 was correlated with appendicular fat mass (p<0.001) and ASMM/wt x100 obtained negative and significant association with fat mass of upper limbs. All MMIs were positively and significantly associated with HS. Concerning metabolic profile, ASMM/ht(2) was the only MMI to correlate with HOMA-IR (r=0.381 p=0.003). Regarding BMD, only the ASMM/wt x100 correlated positively and significantly with all sites (L1-L4, CF and FT) of BMD evaluated. There was only correlation between ASMM/wt x100 and ASMM/BMI (r=0.933 p=0.001). CONCLUSION: The ASMM/wt x100 and the ASMM/BMI seem to be more accurate to evaluate the sarcopenia in obese women than ASMM/ht(2), because they have correlated negatively with adiposity (BMI and BFP). Besides that, both ASMM/wt x100 and ASMM/BMI have correlated with HS, which is an important parameter of disability and mortality. However, only ASMM/wt x100 had correlated positively with all BMD sites evaluated proving to be useful in the evaluation of sarcopenia in obese women preceding BS. Unless otherwise noted, all abstracts presented at ENDO are embargoed until the date and time of presentation. For oral presentations, the abstracts are embargoed until the session begins. Abstracts presented at a news conference are embargoed until the date and time of the news conference. The Endocrine Society reserves the right to lift the embargo on specific abstracts that are selected for promotion prior to or during ENDO.