Assessment of Skeletal Muscle Mass in Older People

Comparison Between 2 Anthropometry-Based Methods and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry

Vincenzo Carnevale, Valeria Castriotta, Angela Pamela Piscitelli, Luciano Nieddu, Maria Mattera, Giuseppe Guglielmi, Alfredo Scillitani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: Sarcopenia is a common geriatric syndrome, whose diagnosis implies the assessment of muscle mass. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference method for clinical practice, but it is not universally available. We compared DXA with 2 anthropometry-based methods to assess muscle mass in older adults. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Ambulatory patients. Participants: 148 (87 female and 61 male) white older adults. Measurements: Mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), whole skeletal muscle mass estimated by the Lee's formula (eTSMM), and relative skeletal muscle index (RSMI). Results: Men and women did not differ for MAMC and RSMI, whereas eTSMM was higher (P <.001) in men. MAMC and eTSMM correlated with RSMI, in the whole sample as in men and women separately (P <.001). According to the McNemar test, the frequencies of older men and women with low muscle mass identified by eTSMM did not differ from those detected by RSMI (P =.066) at variance with MAMC. Using EWGSOP (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People) criteria for RSMI as standard reference, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves provided redefined cut-offs of reduced muscle mass: 18.6 cm in women and 22.3 cm in men for MAMC, and 17.7 kg in women and 28.3 kg in men for eTSMM. The areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for MAMC were 0.882 in women (sensitivity 89%, specificity 84%) and 0.826 in men (sensitivity 94%, specificity 67%). The AUCs for eTSMM were 0.8913 in women (sensitivity 95%, specificity 81%) and 0.878 in men (sensitivity 97%, specificity 67%). No significant difference was found between the ROC curves of MAMC and eTSMM in both sexes. Conclusion: Two simple anthropometric methods, possibly used in every clinical setting, could be valuable screening tools for low muscle mass in older subjects.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)793-796
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of the American Medical Directors Association
Volume19
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 1 2018

Fingerprint

Anthropometry
Photon Absorptiometry
Skeletal Muscle
Muscles
ROC Curve
Sarcopenia
Sensitivity and Specificity
X-Rays
Geriatrics
Area Under Curve

Keywords

  • estimated total skeletal muscle mass
  • mid-arm muscle circumference
  • muscle mass
  • relative skeletal muscle index

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Health Policy
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology

Cite this

Assessment of Skeletal Muscle Mass in Older People : Comparison Between 2 Anthropometry-Based Methods and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry. / Carnevale, Vincenzo; Castriotta, Valeria; Piscitelli, Angela Pamela; Nieddu, Luciano; Mattera, Maria; Guglielmi, Giuseppe; Scillitani, Alfredo.

In: Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, Vol. 19, No. 9, 01.09.2018, p. 793-796.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e643c058c65144809d92c192a69cd0a0,
title = "Assessment of Skeletal Muscle Mass in Older People: Comparison Between 2 Anthropometry-Based Methods and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry",
abstract = "Objectives: Sarcopenia is a common geriatric syndrome, whose diagnosis implies the assessment of muscle mass. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference method for clinical practice, but it is not universally available. We compared DXA with 2 anthropometry-based methods to assess muscle mass in older adults. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Ambulatory patients. Participants: 148 (87 female and 61 male) white older adults. Measurements: Mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), whole skeletal muscle mass estimated by the Lee's formula (eTSMM), and relative skeletal muscle index (RSMI). Results: Men and women did not differ for MAMC and RSMI, whereas eTSMM was higher (P <.001) in men. MAMC and eTSMM correlated with RSMI, in the whole sample as in men and women separately (P <.001). According to the McNemar test, the frequencies of older men and women with low muscle mass identified by eTSMM did not differ from those detected by RSMI (P =.066) at variance with MAMC. Using EWGSOP (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People) criteria for RSMI as standard reference, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves provided redefined cut-offs of reduced muscle mass: 18.6 cm in women and 22.3 cm in men for MAMC, and 17.7 kg in women and 28.3 kg in men for eTSMM. The areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for MAMC were 0.882 in women (sensitivity 89{\%}, specificity 84{\%}) and 0.826 in men (sensitivity 94{\%}, specificity 67{\%}). The AUCs for eTSMM were 0.8913 in women (sensitivity 95{\%}, specificity 81{\%}) and 0.878 in men (sensitivity 97{\%}, specificity 67{\%}). No significant difference was found between the ROC curves of MAMC and eTSMM in both sexes. Conclusion: Two simple anthropometric methods, possibly used in every clinical setting, could be valuable screening tools for low muscle mass in older subjects.",
keywords = "estimated total skeletal muscle mass, mid-arm muscle circumference, muscle mass, relative skeletal muscle index",
author = "Vincenzo Carnevale and Valeria Castriotta and Piscitelli, {Angela Pamela} and Luciano Nieddu and Maria Mattera and Giuseppe Guglielmi and Alfredo Scillitani",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jamda.2018.05.016",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "793--796",
journal = "Journal of the American Medical Directors Association",
issn = "1525-8610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of Skeletal Muscle Mass in Older People

T2 - Comparison Between 2 Anthropometry-Based Methods and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry

AU - Carnevale, Vincenzo

AU - Castriotta, Valeria

AU - Piscitelli, Angela Pamela

AU - Nieddu, Luciano

AU - Mattera, Maria

AU - Guglielmi, Giuseppe

AU - Scillitani, Alfredo

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Objectives: Sarcopenia is a common geriatric syndrome, whose diagnosis implies the assessment of muscle mass. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference method for clinical practice, but it is not universally available. We compared DXA with 2 anthropometry-based methods to assess muscle mass in older adults. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Ambulatory patients. Participants: 148 (87 female and 61 male) white older adults. Measurements: Mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), whole skeletal muscle mass estimated by the Lee's formula (eTSMM), and relative skeletal muscle index (RSMI). Results: Men and women did not differ for MAMC and RSMI, whereas eTSMM was higher (P <.001) in men. MAMC and eTSMM correlated with RSMI, in the whole sample as in men and women separately (P <.001). According to the McNemar test, the frequencies of older men and women with low muscle mass identified by eTSMM did not differ from those detected by RSMI (P =.066) at variance with MAMC. Using EWGSOP (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People) criteria for RSMI as standard reference, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves provided redefined cut-offs of reduced muscle mass: 18.6 cm in women and 22.3 cm in men for MAMC, and 17.7 kg in women and 28.3 kg in men for eTSMM. The areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for MAMC were 0.882 in women (sensitivity 89%, specificity 84%) and 0.826 in men (sensitivity 94%, specificity 67%). The AUCs for eTSMM were 0.8913 in women (sensitivity 95%, specificity 81%) and 0.878 in men (sensitivity 97%, specificity 67%). No significant difference was found between the ROC curves of MAMC and eTSMM in both sexes. Conclusion: Two simple anthropometric methods, possibly used in every clinical setting, could be valuable screening tools for low muscle mass in older subjects.

AB - Objectives: Sarcopenia is a common geriatric syndrome, whose diagnosis implies the assessment of muscle mass. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference method for clinical practice, but it is not universally available. We compared DXA with 2 anthropometry-based methods to assess muscle mass in older adults. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Ambulatory patients. Participants: 148 (87 female and 61 male) white older adults. Measurements: Mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), whole skeletal muscle mass estimated by the Lee's formula (eTSMM), and relative skeletal muscle index (RSMI). Results: Men and women did not differ for MAMC and RSMI, whereas eTSMM was higher (P <.001) in men. MAMC and eTSMM correlated with RSMI, in the whole sample as in men and women separately (P <.001). According to the McNemar test, the frequencies of older men and women with low muscle mass identified by eTSMM did not differ from those detected by RSMI (P =.066) at variance with MAMC. Using EWGSOP (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People) criteria for RSMI as standard reference, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves provided redefined cut-offs of reduced muscle mass: 18.6 cm in women and 22.3 cm in men for MAMC, and 17.7 kg in women and 28.3 kg in men for eTSMM. The areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for MAMC were 0.882 in women (sensitivity 89%, specificity 84%) and 0.826 in men (sensitivity 94%, specificity 67%). The AUCs for eTSMM were 0.8913 in women (sensitivity 95%, specificity 81%) and 0.878 in men (sensitivity 97%, specificity 67%). No significant difference was found between the ROC curves of MAMC and eTSMM in both sexes. Conclusion: Two simple anthropometric methods, possibly used in every clinical setting, could be valuable screening tools for low muscle mass in older subjects.

KW - estimated total skeletal muscle mass

KW - mid-arm muscle circumference

KW - muscle mass

KW - relative skeletal muscle index

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049323939&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049323939&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jamda.2018.05.016

DO - 10.1016/j.jamda.2018.05.016

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 793

EP - 796

JO - Journal of the American Medical Directors Association

JF - Journal of the American Medical Directors Association

SN - 1525-8610

IS - 9

ER -