TY - JOUR
T1 - The effect of different measurement modalities in the association of lean mass with mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Li, Gloria Hoi-Yee
AU - Lee, Grace Koon-Yee
AU - Au, Philip Chun-Ming
AU - Chan, Marcus
AU - Li, Hang-Long
AU - Cheung, Bernard Man-Yung
AU - Wong, Ian Chi-Kei
AU - Lee, Victor Ho-Fun
AU - Mok, James
AU - Yip, Benjamin Hon-Kei
AU - Cheng, Kenneth King-Yip
AU - Wu, Chih-Hsing
AU - Cheung, Ching-Lung
N1 - Co-first authors.
PY - 2021/3
Y1 - 2021/3
N2 - Lean mass is commonly measured by 3 modalities, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), and computerized tomography (CT). CT is considered the most accurate, while lean mass measured by DXA and BIA often consists of non-muscle compartment, and hence considered less accurate when compared with CT. It remains unclear if the association of lean mass with mortality would differ using different measurement modalities. A systematic review and meta-analysis of lean mass and mortality was conducted. The analysis was stratified by different measurement modalities and health conditions. Pooled hazard ratios were estimated using a random effects model. This meta-analysis included 188 studies with 98 468 participants. Reduced lean mass measured by BIA, DXA, and CT, was associated with increased risk of mortality with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.35 (95% CI, 1.21–1.49), 1.18 (95% CI, 1.06–1.30), and 1.44 (95% CI, 1.32–1.57), respectively. Similarly, low lean mass defined by BIA-, DXA-, and CT-measurement was associated with increased risk of mortality, with an HR of 1.81 (95% CI, 1.56–2.10), 1.44 (95% CI, 1.29–1.60), and 1.78 (95% CI, 1.64–1.93). Reduced and low lean mass were robustly associated with increased mortality in studies using different measurement modalities.
AB - Lean mass is commonly measured by 3 modalities, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), and computerized tomography (CT). CT is considered the most accurate, while lean mass measured by DXA and BIA often consists of non-muscle compartment, and hence considered less accurate when compared with CT. It remains unclear if the association of lean mass with mortality would differ using different measurement modalities. A systematic review and meta-analysis of lean mass and mortality was conducted. The analysis was stratified by different measurement modalities and health conditions. Pooled hazard ratios were estimated using a random effects model. This meta-analysis included 188 studies with 98 468 participants. Reduced lean mass measured by BIA, DXA, and CT, was associated with increased risk of mortality with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.35 (95% CI, 1.21–1.49), 1.18 (95% CI, 1.06–1.30), and 1.44 (95% CI, 1.32–1.57), respectively. Similarly, low lean mass defined by BIA-, DXA-, and CT-measurement was associated with increased risk of mortality, with an HR of 1.81 (95% CI, 1.56–2.10), 1.44 (95% CI, 1.29–1.60), and 1.78 (95% CI, 1.64–1.93). Reduced and low lean mass were robustly associated with increased mortality in studies using different measurement modalities.
KW - Lean mass
KW - BIA
KW - DXA
KW - Mortality
KW - Original
U2 - 10.1016/j.afos.2021.02.004
DO - 10.1016/j.afos.2021.02.004
M3 - Journal article
SN - 2405-5255
VL - 7
SP - S13-S18
JO - Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia
JF - Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia
IS - Suppl 1
ER -