Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34485360›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2021

Estimation of Muscle Mass in the Integrated Assessment of Patients on Hemodialysis.

Alice Sabatino, Natascha J H Broers, Frank M van der Sande, Marc H Hemmelder, Enrico Fiaccadori, Jeroen P Kooman

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Body fluid volume calculated using the uric acid kinetic model relates to the vascular event.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alice SabatinoNephrology Unit, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Parma University Hospital, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Natascha J H BroersDivision on Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Frank M van der SandeDivision on Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Marc H HemmelderDivision on Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Enrico FiaccadoriNephrology Unit, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Parma University Hospital, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Jeroen P KoomanDivision on Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLUniversity of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment of muscle mass (MM) or its proxies, lean tissue mass (LTM) or fat-free mass (FFM), is an integral part of the diagnosis of protein-energy wasting (PEW) and sarcopenia in patients on hemodialysis (HD). Both sarcopenia and PEW are related to a loss of functionality and also increased morbidity and mortality in this patient population. However, loss of MM is a part of a wider spectrum, including inflammation and fluid overload. As both sarcopenia and PEW are amendable to treatment, estimation of MM regularly is therefore of major clinical relevance. Whereas, computer-assisted tomography (CT) or dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is considered a reference method, it is unsuitable as a method for routine clinical monitoring. In this review, different bedside methods to estimate MM or its proxies in patients on HD will be discussed, with emphasis on biochemical methods, simplified creatinine index (SCI), bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), and muscle ultrasound (US). Body composition parameters of all methods are related to the outcome and appear relevant in clinical practice. The US is the only parameter by which muscle dimensions are measured. BIS and SCI are also dependent on either theoretical assumptions or the use of population-specific regression equations. Potential caveats of the methods are that SCI can be influenced by residual renal function, BIS can be influenced by fluid overload, although the latter may be circumvented by the use of a three-compartment model, and that muscle US reflects regional and not whole body MM. In conclusion, both SCI and BIS as well as muscle US are all valuable methods that can be applied for bedside nutritional assessment in patients on HD and appear suitable for routine follow-up. The choice for either method depends on local preferences. However, estimation of MM or its proxies should always be part of a multidimensional assessment of the patient followed by a personalized treatment strategy.

Indexed as

bioimpedancecreatinine indexhemodialysissarcopeniaultrasound

Identifiers

PMID34485360
PMCPMC8415223
OpenAlexW3194627667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.