Assessment of phase angle as a novel indicator for sarcopenic obesity according to the ESPEN/EASO criteria in older adults with diabetes mellitus

HAFIZOĞLU M., YILDIRIM H. K., Öztürk Y., ŞAHİNER Z., KARADUMAN D., ATBAŞ C., ...Daha Fazla

Nutrition, cilt.123, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 123
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.nut.2024.112412
  • Dergi Adı: Nutrition
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, PASCAL, Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA), CAB Abstracts, CINAHL, Food Science & Technology Abstracts, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Diabetes mellitus, Older adults, Phase angle, Sarcopenic obesity
  • Hacettepe Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Sarcopenic obesity (SO) is a clinical condition in which sarcopenia and obesity occur together, and is associated with more poor clinical outcomes, increased mortality, and morbidity than sarcopenia. Phase angle (PhA), a parameter derived from bioimpedance analysis (BIA), provides data on cellular health, membrane integrity, and cellular function. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between SO and PhA among older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital, and all participants underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessment, the hand-grip strength test (HGST), the chair stand test (CST) for muscle strength evaluation, the 4-meter walking test, and the timed up-and-go (TUG) test for physical performance assessment. The diagnosis of SO was made according to the ESPEN/EASO criteria. The PhA was determined automatically by the BIA using resistance and reactance at 50 kHz for each participant. Results: A total of 322 participants were included in the study. The mean age of the participants was 72.5 ±5.8, and 203 (63%) of them were female; 63 (19.6%) of them were sarcopenic obese. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, a significant relationship was found when the model was adjusted for age, female gender, MNA-sf scores, HbA1c level, and CCI scores (OR: 0.53, 95%CI: 0.29–0.98, P = 0.04). In ROC analyses, for PhA in predicting SO diagnosis, the AUC was 0.586 (95%CI: 0.505–0.678, P = 0.033). At the cut-off score 4.4, sensitivity was 57.1% and specificity was 61.4%; positive predictive value (PPV) was 26.5%; negative predictive value (NPV) was 85.5%. Conclusions: The study identified a significant relationship between SO and PhA among older adults with type 2 DM. However, larger prospective studies are needed to confirm the potential utility of PhA as a biomarker for SO.