Evidence Hub

Impact of sarcopenia on outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Samuel Knoedler, Rainer Schliermann, Leonard Knoedler, Meng-Fan Wu, Frederik J Hansen, D. Matar, D. Obed, D. Vervoort et al.

International Journal of Surgery, 2023

97 participants · 105 citations

Abstract

Background: Surgeons have historically used age as a preoperative predictor of postoperative outcomes. Sarcopenia, the loss of skeletal muscle mass due to disease or biological age, has been proposed as a more accurate risk predictor. The prognostic value of sarcopenia assessment in surgical patients remains poorly understood. Therefore, the authors aimed to synthesize the available literature and investigate the impact of sarcopenia on perioperative and postoperative outcomes across all surgical specialties. Methods: The authors systematically assessed the prognostic value of sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to 1st October 2022. Their primary outcomes were complication occurrence, mortality, length of operation and hospital stay, discharge to home, and postdischarge survival rate at 1, 3, and 5 years. Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying complications according to the Clavien–Dindo classification system. Sensitivity analysis was performed by focusing on studies with an oncological, cardiovascular, emergency, or transplant surgery population and on those of higher quality or prospective study design. Results: A total of 294 studies comprising 97 643 patients, of which 33 070 had sarcopenia, were included in our analysis. Sarcopenia was associated…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 97 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