BACKGROUND: A universal definition of sarcopenia is still lacking. Since the European criteria have been recently revised, we aimed at studying prevalence of low muscle strength (LMS) and low muscle mass (LMM), as defined according to the European Working Group of Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) 2 and 1 definitions, and their individual contribution toward mortality and incident mobility disability in a cohort of community-dwelling older people. METHODS: Longitudinal analysis of 535 participants of the InCHIANTI study. LMS and LMM were defined according to the criteria indicated in the EWGSOP2 and 1. Cox and log-binomial regressions were used to examine association with mortality and 3-year mobility disability (inability to walk 400 m). RESULTS: We observed a lower prevalence of the combination LMM/LMS according to EWGSOP2 compared to EWGSOP1 (3.2% vs 6.2%). Using the new criteria, all sarcopenia components were associated with mortality, although the hazard ratio [HR] for the group LMM/LMS was no longer significant after adjustment for confounders (LMM: HR 2.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-6.94; LMS: HR 3.18, 95% CI 1.44-7.01; LMM/LMS: HR 2.95, 95% CI 0.86-10.16). Using EWGSOP1, LMS alone was independently associated with mortality (HR 4.43, 95% CI 1.85-10.57). None of the sarcopenia components conferred a higher risk of mobility disability. CONCLUSIONS: The EWGSOP2 algorithm leads to a reduction in the estimated prevalence of sarcopenia defined as combination of LMM/LMS. The finding that, independent of the adopted criteria, people with LMS and normal mass have a higher mortality risk compared to robust individuals, confirms that evaluation of muscle strength has a central role for prognosis evaluation.
BACKGROUND: A universal definition of sarcopenia is still lacking. Since the European criteria have been recently revised, we aimed at studying prevalence of low muscle strength (LMS) and low muscle mass (LMM), as defined according to the European Working Group of Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) 2 and 1 definitions, and their individual contribution toward mortality and incident mobility disability in a cohort of community-dwelling older people. METHODS: Longitudinal analysis of 535 participants of the InCHIANTI study. LMS and LMM were defined according to the criteria indicated in the EWGSOP2 and 1. Cox and log-binomial regressions were used to examine association with mortality and 3-year mobility disability (inability to walk 400 m). RESULTS: We observed a lower prevalence of the combination LMM/LMS according to EWGSOP2 compared to EWGSOP1 (3.2% vs 6.2%). Using the new criteria, all sarcopenia components were associated with mortality, although the hazard ratio [HR] for the group LMM/LMS was no longer significant after adjustment for confounders (LMM: HR 2.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-6.94; LMS: HR 3.18, 95% CI 1.44-7.01; LMM/LMS: HR 2.95, 95% CI 0.86-10.16). Using EWGSOP1, LMS alone was independently associated with mortality (HR 4.43, 95% CI 1.85-10.57). None of the sarcopenia components conferred a higher risk of mobility disability. CONCLUSIONS: The EWGSOP2 algorithm leads to a reduction in the estimated prevalence of sarcopenia defined as combination of LMM/LMS. The finding that, independent of the adopted criteria, people with LMS and normal mass have a higher mortality risk compared to robust individuals, confirms that evaluation of muscle strength has a central role for prognosis evaluation.
Authors: Steven Phu; Sara Vogrin; Jesse Zanker; Ebrahim Bani Hassan; Ahmed Al Saedi; Gustavo Duque Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: C Beaudart; J Y Reginster; J Petermans; S Gillain; A Quabron; M Locquet; J Slomian; F Buckinx; O Bruyère Journal: Exp Gerontol Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 4.032
Authors: J Reiss; B Iglseder; R Alzner; B Mayr-Pirker; C Pirich; H Kässmann; M Kreutzer; P Dovjak; R Reiter Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: L Ferrucci; S Bandinelli; E Benvenuti; A Di Iorio; C Macchi; T B Harris; J M Guralnik Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Lara Bianchi; Luigi Ferrucci; Antonio Cherubini; Marcello Maggio; Stefania Bandinelli; Elisabetta Savino; Gloria Brombo; Giovanni Zuliani; Jack M Guralnik; Francesco Landi; Stefano Volpato Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Ian Janssen; Richard N Baumgartner; Robert Ross; Irwin H Rosenberg; Ronenn Roubenoff Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Helen C Roberts; Hayley J Denison; Helen J Martin; Harnish P Patel; Holly Syddall; Cyrus Cooper; Avan Aihie Sayer Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2011-05-30 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Johannes Maurus; Tobias Terzer; Axel Benner; Sabine Goisser; Annette Eidam; Anja Roth; Maike Janssen; Sonia Jaramillo; Hannes Martin Lorenz; William Micol; Klaus Hauer; Carsten Müller-Tidow; Jürgen M Bauer; Karin Jordan; Nina Rosa Neuendorff Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2021-12-12 Impact factor: 12.910
Authors: Maria Claudia Bernardes Spexoto; Paula Camila Ramírez; Roberta de Oliveira Máximo; Andrew Steptoe; Cesar de Oliveira; Tiago da Silva Alexandre Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 12.782
Authors: Luisa Lampignano; Ilaria Bortone; Fabio Castellana; Rossella Donghia; Vito Guerra; Roberta Zupo; Giovanni De Pergola; Marta Di Masi; Gianluigi Giannelli; Madia Lozupone; Francesco Panza; Heiner Boeing; Rodolfo Sardone Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Miles D Witham; Philip Heslop; Richard M Dodds; Andrew P Clegg; Suzy V Hope; Claire McDonald; David Smithard; Bryony Storey; Ai Lyn Tan; Anna Thornhill; Avan A Sayer Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2021-09-11 Impact factor: 10.668