Cited by 42Nutrition and Health in AgingFrailty in Older AdultsBody Composition Measurement Techniques

Worsening disability and hospitalization risk in sarcopenic obese and dynapenic abdominal obese: A 5.5 years follow-up study in elderly men and women

Open access
Rossi, Andrea P., Urbani, Silvia, Fantin, Francesco, Nori, Nicole, Brandimarte, Piero, Martini, Angela, Zoico, Elena, Mazzali, Gloria +3 more·2020·Frontiers in Endocrinology

Abstract

Background/Objectives: a general lack of studies comparing the effect of both, dynapenic abdominal obesity and sarcopenic obesity on worsening disability and hospitalization risk should be recognized. The aim of the current study was to evaluate with a 5.5-year follow-up, the prognostic value of sarcopenic obesity and dynapenic abdominal obesity definitions on worsening disability and hospitalization risk in a sample of older adults. Subjects/Methods: in 177 women and 97 men, aged 68-78 years, the following outcomes were evaluated at baseline: appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASMM), percent fat mass (FM%), leg isometric strength, body mass index (BMI), lipid profile, vitamin D3, albumin, fibrinogen, glycemia, physical activity level, income, smoking status and comorbidities. The rate of reported disabilities and hospitalization were also assessed at baseline, 1-yr, 2-yrs, 3-yrs and 5.5-yrs follow-up. The study population was classified into: i) non-sarcopenic/obese (NS/O), sarcopenic/non-obese (S/NO), sarcopenic/obese (S/O), non-sarcopenic/non-obese (NS/NO, reference category) according to relative ASMM/FM% tertiles; ii) non-dynapenic/abdominal obese (ND/AO), dynapenic/non-abdominal obese (D/NAO), dynapenic/abdominal obese (D/AO), non-dynapenic/non-abdominal obese (ND/NAO, reference category) according to muscle strength/waist circumference tertiles. Results: The prevalence of D/AO and S/O was 12.0% and 8.0%, respectively. Only 2 subjects were both D/NAO and S/O (0.8%). D/NAO subjects showed a worsening disability risk of 1.69 times (95% CI:1.11-2.57), ND/AO subjects showed a 2-fold increased risk (95%CI:1.34-2.98), while being D/AO more than trebled the risk, even after adjustment for confounding factors (HR: 3.39, 95%; CI:1.91-6.02). By dividing the study population according to the relative ASMM/FM% tertiles, no groups showed an increased risk of worsening disability. The hospitalization risk, even after adjustment for potential confounders, was 1.84 (95% CI:1.06-3.19) for D/AO. Dividing the study population according to the relative ASMM/FM% tertiles, no groups showed increased risk of hospitalization. Conclusions: our results showed that dynapenic abdominal obesity and sarcopenic obesity seem to indicate two distinct phenotypes associated with different health risk profiles. The distribution of participants in waist circumference and muscle strength tertiles allowed for a more accurate risk stratification for worsening disability and hospitalization.

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 · 10.3389/fendo.2020.00314

Cites

27 of 27 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rossi, A. P., Urbani, S., Fantin, F., Nori, N., Brandimarte, P., Martini, A., Zoico, E., Mazzali, G., Babbanini, A., Muollo, V., & Zamboni, M.
Affiliations
University of Verona (IT)
Corresponding author
Rossi, Andrea P.
Venue
Frontiers in Endocrinology
Published
2020-06-30
Volume
11
Pages
314-314
ISSN
1664-2392 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3034158885
Cited by
42
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Endocrinology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Iris (University of Trento) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
Keywords
sarcopenic obesity, disability progression, hospitalization risk, older adults, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, fat mass, waist circumference, muscle strength, prognostic factors, comorbidities, physical activity, vitamin D3, fibrinogen, glycemia, albumin, smoking, income, sex differences, body mass index
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adipose Tissue, Aged, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Persons with Disabilities, Disabled Persons, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Obesity, Prognosis, Risk Factors, Body Mass Index, Hand Strength, Muscle Strength, Sarcopenia, Obesity, Abdominal

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