SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Comparison of sarcopenia prevalence and prognostic features between HFrEF and HFpEF: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate With Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
- Prognostic value of skeletal muscle viscoelasticity in older patients with heart failure: the VISMARC-HF study design.BMC geriatrics · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sarcopenia is closely associated with heart failure (HF); however, no prior meta-analysis has specifically addressed its relation with different ejection fraction phenotypes. This study investigated the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) vs. those with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), compared their prevalence rates, and explored the prognostic outcomes associated with sarcopenia in these phenotypes. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched from their inception to February 2025. Studies reporting the prevalence or prognosis of sarcopenia in patients with HF and defined ejection fraction phenotypes were included. Two authors independently assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Meta-analyses were conducted using Stata 17, with random-effects models applied to heterogeneous data. Results: Twenty studies were included: 17 on sarcopenia prevalence in HFrEF, four in HFpEF, four comparing the prevalence between phenotypes, and two comparing prognoses. The pooled prevalence rate of sarcopenia was 35% and 28% in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF, respectively. Subgroup analyses revealed regional variations: Asian populations showed a higher prevalence in HFrEF (48%) that that in HFpEF (16%), whereas European populations exhibited a higher prevalence in HFpEF (44%) than that in HFrEF (27%). In America, the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with HFrEF was 29%. Age-stratified analyses demonstrated a sarcopenia prevalence of 30% in patients with HFrEF aged ≥65 years vs. 36% in those <65 years. Hospitalized patients with HFrEF had a higher prevalence (45%) than that of the outpatient cohort (23%), whereas hospitalized patients with HFpEF showed a 43% prevalence vs. 16% in outpatients. A meta-analysis of studies directly comparing HFrEF and HFpEF found no significant difference in sarcopenia prevalence (fixed-effect model: RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.01-1.23; Conclusion: In epidemiology, the prevalence of sarcopenia was higher in patients with HFrEF than in those with HFpEF. However, Among studies that include a comparison of the prevalence rates of HFrEF and HFpEF with sarcopenia, meta-analyses have indicated that the ejection fraction phenotype is neither associated with the prevalence of sarcopenia in HF nor with poor outcomes in patients with HF and sarcopenia. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251077599, PROSPERO CRD420251077599.
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.