Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32742960›Full record

ReviewQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2020

Muscle mass assessment in renal disease: the role of imaging techniques.

Alice Sabatino, Claudia D'Alessandro, Giuseppe Regolisti, Francesca di Mario, Giuseppe Guglielmi, Alberto Bazzocchi, Enrico Fiaccadori

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Alice SabatinoDipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università di Parma, Parma, Italy.
Claudia D'AlessandroDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Giuseppe RegolistiDipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università di Parma, Parma, Italy.
Francesca di MarioDipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università di Parma, Parma, Italy.
Giuseppe GuglielmiDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Alberto BazzocchiDiagnostic and Interventional Radiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Enrico FiaccadoriDipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università di Parma, Parma, Italy.
University of Parma · ITIstituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITOspedale di Parma · ITUniversity of Foggia · ITUniversity of Pisa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Muscle wasting is a frequent finding in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), especially in those with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on chronic dialysis. Muscle wasting in CKD is a main feature of malnutrition, and results principally from a vast array of metabolic derangements typical of the syndrome, that converge in determining reduced protein synthesis and accelerated protein catabolism. In this clinical setting, muscle wasting is also frequently associated with disability, frailty, infections, depression, worsened quality of life and increased mortality. On these grounds, the evaluation of nutritional status is crucial for an adequate management of renal patients, and consists of a comprehensive assessment allowing for the identification of malnourished patients and patients at nutritional risk. It is based essentially on the assessment of the extent and trend of body weight loss, as well as of spontaneous dietary intake. Another key component of this evaluation is the determination of body composition, which, depending on the selected method among several ones available, can identify accurately patients with decreased muscle mass. The choice will depend on the availability and ease of application of a specific technique in clinical practice based on local experience, staff resources and good repeatability over time. Surrogate methods, such as anthropometry and bioimpedance analysis (BIA), represent the most readily available techniques. Other methods based on imaging modalities [dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and whole body computed tomography (CT)] are considered to be the "gold standard" reference methods for muscle mass evaluation, but their use is mainly confined to research purposes. New imaging modalities, such as segmental CT scan and muscle ultrasound have been proposed in recent years. Particularly, ultrasound is a promising technique in this field, as it is commonly available for bedside evaluation of renal patients in nephrology wards. However, more data are needed before a routine use of ultrasound for muscle mass evaluation can be recommended in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Body compositionchronic kidney disease (CKD)end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)muscle lossultrasound

Identifiers

PMID32742960
PMCPMC7378093
OpenAlexW3016631535

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.