Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29637239›Full record

ReviewDer Internist2018

[Cachexia and sarcopenia in chronic heart failure : Change in muscle strength and muscle structure].

N Ebner, S von Haehling

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Internist, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N EbnerKlinik für Kardiologie und Pneumologie, Herzzentrum Göttingen, Georg-August-Universität, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland. nicole.ebner@med.uni-goettingen.de.
S von HaehlingKlinik für Kardiologie und Pneumologie, Herzzentrum Göttingen, Georg-August-Universität, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland.
University of Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alterations to the body composition, i.e. the makeup of skeletal muscle, fat and bone density, are frequent in heart insufficiency. Their prevalence and clinical consequences are often underestimated. Cachexia is recognized as a complex multifactorial syndrome in chronic diseases that leads to weight loss. This point constitutes the essential differential criterion from sarcopenia. Cachexia is defined as a non-edematous weight loss of more than 5% within 12 months or less. Cachexia means weight loss, while sarcopenia means loss of muscle mass without weight loss because the functional muscle can be replaced by adipocytes. Sarcopenia is defined as a skeletal muscle mass index (SMMI) of at least 2 standard deviations below the mean value of a healthy young reference group between 20 and 30 years of the same sex and ethnic background. At the same time the walking speed is reduced to 1 m/s or the distance covered in a 6-min walk is <400m. The determination of loss of muscle mass should be carried out by whole body scanning, ideally with dual-energy x‑ray absorptiometry. A reliable and simple method for measurement of performance capability is the short physical performance battery (SPPB) test. The treatment of sarcopenia and cardiac cachexia in patients with heart insufficiency is still a great challenge. Power and endurance training, nutritional supplementation and drug therapy are possible therapeutic approaches; however, the study situation is unsatisfactory.

Indexed as

CachexiaHeart FailureSarcopeniaChronic DiseaseHumansMuscle StrengthAbsorptiometry, dual energy X‑rayDietary supplementsExercise, physicalMuscle, skeletalWalk test

Identifiers

PMID29637239
OpenAlexW2801862798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.