A cross-sectional study on sarcopenia using EWGSOP1 and EWGSOP2 criteria with regional thresholds and different adjustments in a specific geriatric outpatient clinic
Key summary points
To evaluate the impact of (1) different adjustments of body size, (2) regional grip strength thresholds, and (3) EWGSOP1 and EWGSOP2 algorithm on sarcopenia prevalence using regional muscle mass thresholds in a geriatric outpatient clinic specific to endocrinological problems.
There was no sarcopenic patient with the height square adjusted regional muscle mass thresholds for EWGSOP1 and EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia prevalence was 11.7% with EWGSOP2, and 41.1% by the use of regional grip strength thresholds for EWGSOP2 with body mass index adjustments.
The prevalence of sarcopenia varied significantly regarding the adjustment method for muscle mass in this specific patient group including normal to overweight and obese individuals, and also the regional grip strength thresholds whereas the comparison of the two criteria was not possible due to lack of sarcopenic individuals with height square adjusted regional muscle mass thresholds.
The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of sarcopenia according to different methods in older outpatients using regional threshold values of muscle mass and muscle strength.
We used data from our university hospital’s geriatric outpatient clinic specific to endocrinological problems, retrospectively. Sarcopenia was defined according to European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP)1 and EWGSOP2 criteria using regional threshold values of skeletal muscle mass (SMM) with the use of different adjustments, and also according to EWGSOP2 with regional threshold values of grip strength.
Among 248 study participants, 53.6% were obese. There was no sarcopenic patient with the height square adjusted regional SMM thresholds for EWGSOP1 and EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia prevalence was 11.7% with EWGSOP2, and 41.1% by the use of regional grip strength thresholds for EWGSOP2 with body mass index adjustments for SMM. The comparison of EWGSOP1 versus EWGSOP2 was not possible due to lack of sarcopenic patients with height adjustment.
The prevalence of sarcopenia varied significantly with the application of different adjustment methods for SMM, and the use of regional grip strength thresholds in the specific patient group with normal to overweight and obese individuals. The use of regional thresholds of grip strength increased the prevalence of EWGSOP2-defined sarcopenia. The impact of the adjustment methods, the characteristics of the study population, and the regional thresholds should be taken into consideration while evaluating the results of sarcopenia studies.
KeywordsSarcopenia criteria Skeletal muscle mass adjustment Regional thresholds Aged
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board of Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Faculty of Medicine-Ege University and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study
- 3.Steffl M, Sima J, Shiells K, Holmerova I (2017) The increase in health care costs associated with muscle weakness in older people without long-term illnesses in the Czech Republic: results from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). Clin Interv Aging 12:2003–2007. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S150826 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 6.Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F et al (2010) Sarcopenia: european consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European working group on sarcopenia in older people. Age Ageing 39(4):412–423. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afq034 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 7.Morley JE, Abbatecola AM, Argiles JM, Baracos V, Bauer J, Bhasin S, Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders Trialist Workshop et al (2011) Sarcopenia with limited mobility: an international consensus. J Am Med Dir Assoc 12:403–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2011.04.014 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 8.Fielding RA, Vellas B, Evans WJ, Bhasin S, Morley JE, Newman AB et al (2011) Sarcopenia: an undiagnosed condition in older adults. Current consensus definition: prevalence, etiology, and consequences. International working group on sarcopenia. J Am Med Dir Assoc 12(4):249–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2011.01.003 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.Bahat G, Tufan A, Kilic C, Aydın T, Akpinar TS, Kose M et al (2018) Cut-off points for height, weight and body mass index adjusted bioimpedance analysis measurements of muscle mass with use of different threshold definitions. Aging Male. https://doi.org/10.1080/13685538.2018.1499081 (Epub ahead of print) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Deurenberg P, Pietrobelli A, Wang ZM, Heymsfield SB (2004) Prediction of total body skeletal muscle mass from fat-free mass or intra-cellular water. Int J Body Compos Res 2:107–113Google Scholar
- 20.Lauretani F, Russo CR, Bandinelli S, Bartali B, Cavazzini C, Di Iorio A et al (2003) Age-associated changes in skeletal muscles and their effect on mobility: an operational diagnosis of sarcopenia. J Appl Physiol 95(5):1851–1860. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00246.2003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Ural D, Kılıçkap M, Göksülük H, Karaaslan D, Kayıkçıoğlu M, Özer N et al (2018) Data on prevalence of obesity and waist circumference in Turkey: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta regression of epidemiological studies on cardiovascular risk factors. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars 46(7):577–590. https://doi.org/10.5543/tkda.2018.62200 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Rodríguez-García WD, García-Castañeda L, Vaquero-Barbosa N, Mendoza-Núñez VM, Orea-Tejeda A, Perkisas S et al (2018) Prevalence of dynapenia and presarcopenia related to aging in adult community-dwelling Mexicans using two different cut-off points. Eur Geriatr Med 9(2):219–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-018-0032-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Öztürk ZA, Türkbeyler İH, Abiyev A, Kul S, Edizer B, Yakaryılmaz FD et al (2018) Health-related quality of life and fall risk associated with age-related body composition changes; sarcopenia, obesity and sarcopenic obesity. Intern Med J 48(8):973–981. https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.13935 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Reiss J, Iglseder B, Alzner R, Mayr-Pirker B, Pirich C, Kässmann H et al (2019) Consequences of applying the new EWGSOP2 guideline instead of the former EWGSOP guideline for sarcopenia case finding in older patients. Age Ageing. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afz035 (Epub ahead of print) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 38.Otsuka R, Matsui Y, Tange C, Nishita Y, Tomida M, Ando F et al (2018) What is the best adjustment of appendicular lean mass for predicting mortality or disability among Japanese community dwellers? BMC Geriatr 18(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0699-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 41.Delmonico MJ, Harris TB, Lee JS, Visser M, Nevitt M, Kritchevsky SB et al (2007) Alternative definitions of sarcopenia, lower extremity performance, and functional impairment with aging in older men and women. J Am Geriatr Soc 55:769–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01140.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 42.Cawthon PM, Peters KW, Shardell MD, McLean RR, Dam TT, Kenny AM et al (2014) Cutpoints for low appendicular lean mass that identify older adults with clinically significant weakness. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 69:567–575. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glu023 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar