Dataset Information

Health Outcomes of Sarcopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review to assess the short-, middle- and long-term consequences of sarcopenia.

Methods

Prospective studies assessing the consequences of sarcopenia were searched across different electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EBM Reviews ACP Journal Club, EBM Reviews DARE and AMED). Only studies that used the definition of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People to diagnose sarcopenia were included. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. For outcomes reported by three or more studies, a meta-analysis was performed. The study results are expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI.

Results

Of the 772 references identified through the database search, 17 were included in this systematic review. The number of participants in the included studies ranged from 99 to 6658, and the duration of follow-up varied from 3 months to 9.8 years. Eleven out of 12 studies assessed the impact of sarcopenia on mortality. The results showed a higher rate of mortality among sarcopenic subjects (pooled OR of 3.596 (95% CI 2.96-4.37)). The effect was higher in people aged 79 years or older compared with younger subjects (p = 0.02). Sarcopenia is also associated with functional decline (pooled OR of 6 studies 3.03 (95% CI 1.80-5.12)), a higher rate of falls (2/2 studies found a significant association) and a higher incidence of hospitalizations (1/1 study). The impact of sarcopenia on the incidence of fractures and the length of hospital stay was less clear (only 1/2 studies showed an association for both outcomes).

Conclusion

Sarcopenia is associated with several harmful outcomes, making this geriatric syndrome a real public health burden.

SUBMITTER: Beaudart C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5240970 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The prevalence of sarcopenia and its clinical predictors and clinical impact vary among kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), in part because of different diagnostic criteria. This study aimed to assess the reported diagnosis criteria of sarcopenia and compare them in terms of prevalence, clinical predictors, and impact of sarcopenia. The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for the full-length reports published until 28 January 2022. The subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 . A total of 681 studies were retrieved, among which only 23 studies (including 2535 subjects, 59.7% men, mean age 49.8 years) were eventually included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence in these included studies was 26% [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 20-34%, I2 = 93.45%], including 22% (95% CI: 14-32%, I2 = 88.76%) in men and 27% (95% CI: 14-41%, I2 = 90.56%) in women (P = 0.554 between subgroups). The prevalence of sarcopenia diagnosed using low muscle mass was 34% (95% CI: 21-48%, I2 = 95.28%), and the prevalence of using low muscle mass in combination with low muscle strength and/or low physical performance was 21% (95% CI: 15-28%, I2 = 90.37%) (P = 0.08 between subgroups). In meta-regression analyses, the mean age (regression coefficient: 1.001, 95% CI: 0.991-1.011) and percentage male (regression coefficient: 0.846, 95% CI: 0.367-1.950) could not predict the effect size. Lower body mass index (odds ratio (OR): 0.57, 95% CI: 0.39-0.84, I2 = 61.5%), female sex (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16-0.61, I2 = 0.0%), and higher age (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.05-1.10, I2 = 10.1%) were significantly associated with a higher risk for sarcopenia in KTRs, but phase angle (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.16-4.26, I2 = 84.5%) was not associated with sarcopenia in KTRs. Sarcopenia was not associated with rejections (risk ratio (RR): 0.67, 95% CI: 0.23-1.92, I2 = 12.1%), infections (RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.34-3.12, I2 = 87.4%), delayed graft functions (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.46-1.43, I2 = 0.0%), and death (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.32-2.82, I2 = 0.0%) in KRTs. Sarcopenia was found to be very common in KRTs. However, we have not found that sarcopenia had a negative impact on clinical health after kidney transplantation. Large study cohorts and multicentre longitudinal studies in the future are urgently needed to explore the prevalence and prognosis of sarcopenia in kidney transplant patients.

Project description:AimsSarcopenia has been found to be frequently associated with co-morbidity among patients with heart failure (HF). However, there remain insufficient data to accurately estimate the global prevalence of sarcopenia in HF. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the current overall prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with HF.Methods and resultsWe searched relevant databases for studies published up to 13 July 2020, assessing sarcopenia in vpatients with HF. After careful screening, data of included articles were extracted with a predesigned Excel form. Then the pooled prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with HF was calculated using the random-effects model. The Q test was used to assess the heterogeneity, and I2 statistic was calculated to quantify and evaluate the heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted to determine potential sources of heterogeneity. A total of 2852 articles were initially identified, and after removing duplicate publications and applying the selection criteria, we reviewed 79 full-text articles. Finally, 11 articles (n = 1742 patients with HF) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with HF was 34% [95% confidence interval (CI): 22-47%, I2 = 96.59%] and ranged from 10% to 69%. However, substantial heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 96.59%, P < 0.001) was observed. There was no significant heterogeneity between subgroups by sex (P = 0.803) or the method used to define sarcopenia (P = 0.307). While the heterogeneity between subgroups by population setting was statistically significant (P < 0.001), the pooled prevalence of sarcopenia was 55% (95% CI: 43-66%) for hospitalized patients with HF and 26% (95% CI: 16-37%) for ambulatory patients.ConclusionsSarcopenia was a common condition in patients with HF, and the prevalence of hospitalized patients was higher than for ambulatory patients. Early detection of sarcopenia was therefore important in patients with HF, and it was important to implement interventions so that physical therapists or managerial dieticians can easily be introduced into clinical practice.

Project description:Sarcopenia is an age-related disease and is often accompanied by other diseases. Now, many studies have shown that cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) may raise the incidence rate of sarcopenia. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with CVDs compared with the general population, defined as relatively healthy non-hospitalized subjects. The databases of PubMed, Embase, Medline and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies published up to 12 November 2022. Two assessment tools were used to evaluate study quality and the risk of bias. Statistical analysis was conducted using STATA 14.0 and R Version 4.1.2. Thirty-eight out of the 89 629 articles retrieved were included in our review. The prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 10.1% to 68.9% in patients with CVDs, and the pooled prevalence was 35% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 28-42%). The pooled prevalence of sarcopenia was 32% (95% CI: 23-41%) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), 61% (95% CI: 49-72%) in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), 43% (95% CI: 2-85%) in patients with coronary artery disease, 30% (95% CI: 25-35%) in patients with cardiac arrhythmia (CA), 35% (95% CI: 10-59%) in patients with congenital heart disease and 12% (95% CI: 7-17%) in patients with unclassed CVDs. However, in the general population, the prevalence of sarcopenia varied from 2.9% to 28.6% and the pooled prevalence was 13% (95% CI: 9-17%), suggesting that the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with CVDs was about twice compared with the general population. The prevalence of sarcopenia was significantly higher only in patients with ADHF, CHF and CA compared with the general population. There is a positive correlation between CVDs and sarcopenia. The prevalence of sarcopenia is higher in patients with CVDs than that in the general population. With global aging, sarcopenia has brought a heavy burden to individuals and society. Therefore, it is important to identify the populations with high-risk or probable sarcopenia in order to do an early intervention, such as exercise, to counteract or slow down the progress of sarcopenia.

Project description:ImportanceProsocial interventions encourage voluntary actions that benefit others. Community solidarity in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, expanding mutual aid programs, and health workforce issues have accelerated prosocial health interventions.ObjectiveTo investigate the association of prosocial interventions with health outcomes in clinical trials and observational studies.Data sourcesIn this systematic review and meta-analysis informed by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 5 databases (MEDLINE [via PubMed], Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Scopus) were searched from database inception through February 23, 2023. The search included terms for altruism and prosocial behaviors, health outcomes, and study type.Study selectionIncluded studies, determined by multiple reviewers, compared health outcomes in a prosocial intervention group with a nonintervention group.Data extraction and synthesisFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline, data extraction and synthesis captured quantitative and qualitative data. To pool data from quantitative studies, random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate the impact of prosocial interventions. To combine data from quantitative and qualitive studies, data were transformed into qualitative narratives using meta-aggregation.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was whether prosocial interventions were associated with improved health outcomes. Barriers to and facilitators of implementation of these interventions were assessed.ResultsThe search identified 5229 citations; 30 studies were included in the synthesis. Studies indicated that prosocial interventions were associated with positive health outcomes for givers (17 studies [56.7]) and recipients (8 [26.7%]). Prosocial interventions included acts of kindness (12 studies [40.0%]), cash gifts (7 [23.3%]), pay-it-forward approaches (6 [20.0%]), and expressions of kindness (5 [16.7%]). Improvements were reported in depression, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, vaccine uptake, physical activity, and individual biomarkers. Data from 6 studies (20.0%) demonstrated that pay-it-forward approaches were associated with increased uptake of diagnostic tests or vaccines among vulnerable groups (moderate certainty of evidence). Data from 14 studies (46.7%) suggested that community connectedness facilitated prosocial interventions. Shared vulnerabilities among groups (eg, sexual minority individuals, older adults) may provide a context for collective mobilization to improve health in local communities.Conclusions and relevanceThis systematic review and meta-analysis found that prosocial interventions were associated with improved health outcomes among vulnerable groups and have been useful for addressing health disparities. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate prosocial interventions.