Difference in sarcopenia prevalence and associated factors according to 2010 and 2018 European consensus (EWGSOP) in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

• Published in: Experimental gerontology 2020-04, Vol.132, p.110835-110835, Article 110835
• Main Authors: de Freitas, Mauren M., de Oliveira, Vanessa L.P., Grassi, Thaiciane, Valduga, Kamila, Miller, Maria Elisa P., Schuchmann, Renata A., Souza, Karen L.A., de Azevedo, Mirela J., Viana, Luciana V., de Paula, Tatiana P.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Absorptiometry, Photon; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Brazil; Consensus; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 - complications; Elderly; Electric Impedance; Female; Hand Strength; Humans; Independent Living; Male; Middle Aged; Muscle Strength; Prevalence; Sarcopenia; Sarcopenia - diagnosis; Sarcopenia - epidemiology; Type 2 diabetes; Walking
• ISSN: 0531-5565; 1873-6815
• DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2020.110835

The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of sarcopenia and associated factors in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) according to 2010 (EWGSOP1) and 2018 (EWGSOP2) European consensus. Cross-sectional study. Elderly outpatients ≥60 years with type 2 DM and able to walk were recruited at the DM ambulatory care center of a public hospital in Porto Alegre from 2017 to 2018. The diagnosis of sarcopenia was performed according to EWGSOP1 and EWGSOP2. Muscle mass (MM) was assessed using bioelectrical impedance (BIA). Muscle strength (MS) was assessed using the handgrip strength (HS) test and physical performance (PP) by timed-up-and-go (TUG) test. We included 242 patients with 68.3 ± 5.6 years, 54% women, 78% white, DM duration 14(8–22) years, BMI 29.5 ± 4.5 kg/m2, and HbA1c 7.8 ± 1.5%. Overall prevalence of sarcopenia was 21%. In EWGSOP1 it was 16.9%. The GLM Poisson model was used to assess sarcopenia. Male sex increased the prevalence of sarcopenia by 33% (3.330 [1.747–6.350]; p 5401 steps/day had a protective effect of 70% for the prevalence of sarcopenia (0.306 [0.127–0.739]; p = .029). Finally, age had an impact of 6% on prevalence of sarcopenia (1.06 [1.015–1.108]; p = .009) according to EWGSOP1. On the other hand, the prevalence was 7%, women had more sarcopenia (88%), and BMI was lower in the sarcopenic group when defined according to EWGSOP2. The prevalence of sarcopenia was more than double when comparing EWGSOP1 (16.9%) and EWGSOP2 (7%). We believe that the difference in prevalence is due to modifications in MM and MS criteria. According to EWGSOP1, walking may have protective role in the prevalence of sarcopenia in elderly type 2 DM individuals. •Overall prevalence of sarcopenia was 21% in patients with type 2 DM.•The prevalence was 16.9% (EWGSOP1) and 7% (EWGSOP2).•The prevalence difference between the consensus probably was due to changes in SMI and HS cut-off points.•Steps/day, older age, and male sex were associated with sarcopenia in EWGSOP1, and female sex in EWGSOP2.•In EWGSOP2 5.8% of patients with normal HS had low PP, and these individuals have no classification stage of sarcopenia.