Comparing the prognostic value of the old and new sarcopenia criteria from the Asian Working Group on Sarcopenia in older adults with type 2 diabetes: Which set is more appropriate?

backgroundThis study aimed to compare the prevalence of sarcopenia according to the old and new Asian Working Group on Sarcopenia (AWGS) operational criteria and explore the effects of sarcopenia on adverse outcomes in older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

methodsA total of 386 patients with T2D aged ≥ 60 years were recruited in retrospective cohort study. Sarcopenia was assessed with different versions of the AWGS consensus, including the AWGS2014, AWGS2019H (muscle mass adjusted for height), and AWGS2019B (muscle mass adjusted for body mass index). The median follow-up period was 47 months. The composite primary endpoint was the first occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), fragility fracture, and all-cause mortality and the secondary outcomes included the three separate components of the primary outcome.

resultsIn this study, the prevalence of sarcopenia under different criteria was significantly different, with AWGS2019H having the highest prevalence of 31.3%. The agreement among sarcopenia criteria was unsatisfactory. By Cox regression analysis, all three AWGS definitions of sarcopenia were associated with the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, fracture and CVD (hazard ratio [HR], 2.69 vs. HR, 2.63; vs. HR, 2.23; model 3). Further exploratory analysis, sarcopenia defined by the AWGS2019H criteria was an independent risk factor for death, incident CVD, and fractures. While AWGS2014 criteria was an increased risk factor of death and CVD. The AWGS2019B criteria were only associated with incident fractures.

conclusionAll three AWGS definitions of sarcopenia were associated the composite primary endpoint. Additionally, the AWGS2019H criteria may be a better independent risk factor for negative health outcomes.