SynthesisAnatolian journal of cardiology2025
Sarcopenic Obesity and Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Muscle Strength as a Key Independent Predictor of Arterial Stiffness and Metabolic Syndrome in Aging Mexicans: Unveiling the Sarcopenic Obesity Paradox.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Pericoronary, but Not Epicardial, Cardiac Fat Thickness Is Associated with Sarcopenia in Hospitalized Older Adults.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Interplay between sarcopenia and type 2 diabetes: mechanisms, implications, and therapeutic prospects.Nutrition & diabetes · 2026Review
- Musculoskeletal degeneration and cardiovascular aging: a narrative review of shared mechanobiological pathways.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- Muscle Mass Moderates Metabolic Syndrome Risk Associated with Adiposity: A SHAP-Based Machine Learning Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile both sarcopenia and obesity independently elevate cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, their combined effects, known as sarcopenic obesity (SO), remain incompletely understood. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between SO and the risk of CVD and CVD-related mortality.
methodsA comprehensive search of scientific databases was conducted from inception to May 2025, including observational studies assessing SO in relation to incident CVD or CVD mortality. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses examined variations by age, sex, geography, study design, and CVD subtypes, with P-values for interaction being assessed.
resultsSixteen studies involving 578 408 participants were included. Sarcopenic obesity was significantly associated with a 95% higher CVD risk (OR = 1.95, P < .001, 95% CI: 1.62-2.36) and a 64% increased CVD mortality risk (OR = 1.64, P = .007, 95% CI: 1.15-2.34). Subgroup analyses revealed stronger associations in males and diabetic subgroups. The highest risks were observed for myocardial infarction (OR = 4.07, P = .015, 95% CI: 1.31-12.63) and atrial fibrillation (OR = 2.93, P < .001, 95% CI: 2.23-3.86). Significant interactions were detected by sex (P = .032) and cardiovascular outcome type (P = .001), but not by age, region, or study design.
conclusionSarcopenic obesity is a high-risk phenotype associated with significantly elevated CVD incidence and mortality, with effect modification by sex and outcome type. These findings highlight the need for standardized diagnostic criteria and targeted interventions to mitigate cardiovascular risk in this growing 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.