ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2025
Sarcopenia index as a predictor of ventricular arrhythmia risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a longitudinal study.
Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe correlation between sarcopenia and diabetes mellitus (DM) holds considerable importance. The prognosis of ventricular arrhythmias in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus complicated by sarcopenia remains uncertain.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with DM who underwent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation at Fuwai Hospital. Sarcopenia status was assessed using the biomarker sarcopenia index(SI). Patients were divided into low SI (less than 81.33, n = 74) and high SI (greater than 81.33, n = 158) groups according to the best cut-off value. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias. Secondary endpoint was appropriate shock therapy.
resultsA total of 232 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included. The average follow-up period was 25.85 ± 16.13 months. During the follow-up, a total of 69 cases (29.7%) of ventricular arrhythmias and 31 cases (13.4%) of appropriate shock therapy were recorded. ROC analysis showed that SI had a good predictive value for ventricular arrhythmias (AUC 0.807, cut point value 81.33, sensitivity 66.7%, specificity 82.8%). The lower SI groups had an increased proportion of ventricular arrhythmias (62.2% vs. 14.6%, P < 0.001) and appropriate shock therapy (28.4% vs. 6.3%, P < 0.001) during follow-up. The KM curve showed significantly increased risk of ventricular arrhythmias (log-rank P < 0.001) and appropriate shock (log-rank P < 0.001) in the lower SI group. Multivariate analysis showed that low SI was an independent risk factor for ventricular arrhythmias (hazard ratio (HR) 5.318, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.198-8.841, P < 0.001), and appropriate shock (hazard ratio (HR) 5.765, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.689-12.361, P < 0.001).
conclusionsIn diabetic patients, SI has a high prediction value for the occurrence of ventricular arrhythmia, and is anticipated to serve as a prognostic indicator for the likelihood of sudden cardiac death in this patient population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.