Evidence Hub

Sarcopenia index as a predictor of clinical outcomes among older adult patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cross-sectional study

Xuanna Zhao, Ru-Song Su, R. Hu, Yu-Juan Chen, Xiao-Yong Xu, Yalian Yuan, Jinhong Zhang, Wenchao Zhang et al.

BMC Geriatrics, 2023

306 participants · 27 citations

Abstract

Background Sarcopenia is a geriatric syndrome with progressive loss of skeletal muscle mass and function and has a negative impact on clinical outcomes associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Recently, the sarcopenia index (SI) was developed as a surrogate marker of sarcopenia based upon the serum creatinine to cystatin C ratio. We aimed to assess the value of SI for predicting clinically important outcomes among elderly patients with acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD). Methods This cross-sectional study included elderly patients with AECOPD in China from 2017 to 2021. Clinical data were collected from medical records, and serum creatinine and cystatin C were measured. Outcomes included respiratory failure, heart failure, severe pneumonia, invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality. Binary logistic regression was used to analyze the association between SI and clinical outcomes. Results A total of 306 patients (260 men, 46 women, age range 60–88 years) were enrolled in this study. Among the total patients, the incidence of respiratory failure and severe pneumonia was negatively associated with SI values. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, binary logistic regression analyses showed that a higher SI was still independently associated with a lower risk of respiratory failure (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13–0.56, P < 0.05). In subgroup analysis, the incidence of respiratory failure was negatively associated…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 306 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free