Dr. Gülistan Bahat, MD, Istanbul University Istanbul Medical School Department of Internal Medicine Division of Geriatrics Capa, 34093, Istanbul, Turkey, Telephone: +90 212 414 20 00- 31478, 33090, Fax: +90 212 414 22 48, +90 212 532 42 08,
J Nutr Health Aging. 2018;22(9):1034-1038. doi: 10.1007/s12603-018-1072-y.
To compare the diagnostic value of the SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) with the standard SARC-F to screen sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
Cross-sectional, diagnostic accuracy study.
Geriatric outpatient clinic of a university hospital.
Older adults >= 65 years.
Muscle mass (bioimpedance analysis device), muscle strength (hand grip strength-Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer), and physical performance (usual gait speed). Four currently used diagnostic criteria [European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), International Working Group on Sarcopenia (IWGS), and Society on Sarcopenia Cachexia and Wasting Disorders (SCWD) criteria] were applied. SARC-CalF was performed by using two different calf circumference threshold: standard cut-off 31 cm (SARC-CalF-31) and national cut-off 33 cm (SARC-CalF-33). The sensitivity/specificity analyses of the SARC-CalF and SARC-F tools were run. We used the receiver operating characteristics curves and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUC) to compare the diagnostic accuracy to identify sarcopenia.
We included 207 subjects; 67 male and 140 female with a mean age of 74.6±6.7 years. The prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 1.9% to 9.2%. The sensitivity of SARC-F was between 25% (EWGSOP) and 50% (IWGS); specificity was about 82%. For SARC-CalF-31 and SARC-CalF-33 sensitivity was in general similar -between 25-50%- which pointed out that SARC-CalF was not superior to SARC-F for sensitivity in this sample. Corresponding specificities for SARC-CalF-31 and SARC-CalF-33 were higher than SARC-F and were between 90-98%. Additionally, the AUC values, which indicates the diagnostic accuracy of a screening test, were in general higher for SARC-CalF-33 than the SARC-F and SARC-CalF-31.
We reported that addition of calf circumference item to SARC-F tool improved the specificity and diagnostic accuracy of SARC-F but it did not improve the sensitivity in a community-dwelling Turkish older adult population sample that had low prevalence of sarcopenia. The performance of SARC-CalF tool to screen sarcopenia is to be studied in different populations and living settings.
比较 SARC-F 联合小腿围(SARC-CalF)与标准 SARC-F 对社区居住的老年人进行肌少症筛查的诊断价值。
横断面、诊断准确性研究。
大学医院老年门诊。
年龄≥65 岁的老年人。
肌肉质量(生物阻抗分析装置)、肌肉力量(手握力-Jamar 液压手动测力计)和身体表现(通常的步行速度)。应用了目前使用的四种诊断标准[欧洲老年人肌少症工作组(EWGSOP)、美国国立卫生研究院基金会(FNIH)、国际肌少症工作组(IWGS)和肌肉减少症、恶病质和废用综合征学会(SCWD)标准]。通过使用两种不同的小腿围阈值(标准截断值 31cm[SARC-CalF-31]和国家截断值 33cm[SARC-CalF-33])来进行 SARC-CalF 检测。对 SARC-CalF 和 SARC-F 工具的敏感性/特异性分析进行了分析。我们使用受试者工作特征曲线和受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)来比较诊断准确性,以识别肌少症。
我们纳入了 207 名受试者,其中男性 67 名,女性 140 名,平均年龄为 74.6±6.7 岁。肌少症的患病率为 1.9%-9.2%。SARC-F 的灵敏度在 25%(EWGSOP)到 50%(IWGS)之间;特异性约为 82%。对于 SARC-CalF-31 和 SARC-CalF-33,灵敏度通常在 25-50%之间,这表明在本样本中,SARC-CalF 并不优于 SARC-F 的灵敏度。SARC-CalF-31 和 SARC-CalF-33 的相应特异性高于 SARC-F,在 90%-98%之间。此外,AUC 值(一种用于筛查试验的诊断准确性的指标)通常在 SARC-CalF-33 中高于 SARC-F 和 SARC-CalF-31。
我们报告称,在 SARC-F 工具中添加小腿围项目提高了 SARC-F 的特异性和诊断准确性,但在肌少症患病率较低的土耳其社区居住的老年人群体样本中,并没有提高灵敏度。SARC-CalF 工具用于筛查肌少症的性能有待在不同人群和生活环境中进行研究。