Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The rate and assessment of muscle wasting during critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Fazzini, Brigitta, Märkl, Tobias, Costas, Christos, Blobner, Manfred, Schaller, Stefan J., Prowle, John, Puthucheary, Zudin, Wackerhage, Henning·2023·Critical Care

Abstract

Background: Patients with critical illness can lose more than 15% of muscle mass in one week, and this can have long-term detrimental effects. However, there is currently no synthesis of the data of intensive care unit (ICU) muscle wasting studies, so the true mean rate of muscle loss across all studies is unknown. The aim of this project was therefore to systematically synthetise data on the rate of muscle loss and to identify the methods used to measure muscle size and to synthetise data on the prevalence of ICU-acquired weakness in critically ill patients. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed, AMED, BNI, CINAHL, and EMCARE until January 2022 (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [PROSPERO] registration: CRD420222989540. We included studies with at least 20 adult critically ill patients where the investigators measured a muscle mass-related variable at two time points during the ICU stay. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and assessed the study quality using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Fifty-two studies that included 3251 patients fulfilled the selection criteria. These studies investigated the rate of muscle wasting in 1773 (55%) patients and assessed ICU-acquired muscle weakness in 1478 (45%) patients. The methods used to assess muscle mass were ultrasound in 85% (n = 28/33) of the studies and computed tomography in the rest 15% (n = 5/33). During the first week of critical illness, patients lost every day −1.75% (95% CI −2.05, −1.45) of their rectus femoris thickness or −2.10% (95% CI −3.17, −1.02) of rectus femoris cross-sectional area. The overall prevalence of ICU-acquired weakness was 48% (95% CI 39%, 56%). Conclusion: On average, critically ill patients lose nearly 2% of skeletal muscle per day during the first week of ICU admission.

Overview

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 · 10.1186/s13054-022-04253-0

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 70 references

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
Fazzini, B., Märkl, T., Costas, C., Blobner, M., Schaller, S. J., Prowle, J., Puthucheary, Z., & Wackerhage, H.
Venue
Critical Care
Published
2023-01-03
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
2-2
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4313522108
Cited by
384
References
70
FWCI
26.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The rate and assessment of muscle wasting during critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13054-022-04253-0
The paper
Fazzini, B., Märkl, T., Costas, C., Blobner, M., Schaller, S. J., Prowle, J., Puthucheary, Z., & Wackerhage, H. (2023). The rate and assessment of muscle wasting during critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04253-0

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.