Cited by 259Nutrition and Health in AgingBody Composition Measurement TechniquesGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes

Body composition assessment and sarcopenia in patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Kamarajah, Sivesh K., Bundred, James, Tan, Benjamin H. L.·2019·Gastric Cancer

Abstract

Introduction There has recently been increased interest in the assessment of body composition in patients with gastric cancer for the purpose of prognostication. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the current literature on body composition assessment in patients with gastric cancer and its impact on peri-operative outcomes.Methods A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting assessment of body composition in patients with gastric cancers. Meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes (overall and major complications, anastomotic leaks, pulmonary complications) and survival was performed using random effects models.Results Thirty-nine studies reported the assessment of body composition in 8402 patients. Methods used to assess body composition in patients with gastric cancers were computerized tomography (n = 26), bioelectrical impedance analysis (n = 9), and dual-energy-X-ray-absorptiometry (n = 3). Only 21 studies reported the impact of pre-operative sarcopenia on post-operative outcomes. Sarcopenic patients have significantly higher rates of postoperative major complications (n = 12, OR 1.67, CI 95% 1.14-2.46, p = 0.009), and pulmonary (n = 8, OR 4.01, CI 95% 2.23-7.21, p < 0.001) complications after gastrectomy. Meta-analysis of nine studies reporting overall survival after gastrectomy identified significantly worse survival in patients with pre-operative sarcopenia (HR 2.12, CI 95% 1.89-2.38, p < 0.001).Conclusions Assessment of body composition has the potential to become a clinically useful tool that could support decision-making in patients with gastric cancer. However, variation in methods of assessing and reporting body composition in this patient group limits assessment of current post-operative outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10120-018-0882-2

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Stojcev Z, Matysiak K, Duszewski M, et al. The role of die- tary nutrition in stomach cancer. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2013;17(4):343-5.
  2. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of obser- vational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta- analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008-12.
  3. Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC. Enhanced recovery after sur- gery: a review. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(3):292-8.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kamarajah, S. K., Bundred, J., & Tan, B. H. L.
Affiliations
Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Tan, Benjamin H. L.
Venue
Gastric Cancer
Published
2018-10-01
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
10-22
ISSN
  • 1436-3291 (ISSN-L)
  • 1436-3305
OpenAlex
W2895672555
Cited by
259
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 23 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gastric Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Keywords
body composition, sarcopenia, preoperative assessment, gastrectomy, postoperative complications, pulmonary complications, anastomotic leakage, overall survival, outcome prediction, bioelectrical impedance analysis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, computed tomography
MeSH terms
Body Composition, Humans, Prognosis, Risk Factors, Stomach Neoplasms, Sarcopenia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review