4.5 Article

Upper arm anthropometrics versus DXA scan in survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 72, 期 4, 页码 613-617

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41430-018-0106-1

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI [R24 HL111895, R01HL091760, R01HL091760-02S1, R01HL096504, R01HL88045, P050HL73994]
  2. Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (ICTR) [UL1 TR 000424-06]
  3. ALTA
  4. EDEN
  5. OMEGA
  6. SAILS trials [HSN268200536170C, HHSN268200536 171C, HHSN268200536173C, HHSN268200536174C, HSN268200536175C, HHSN268200536179C]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) experience severe muscle wasting. Upper arm anthropometrics can provide a quick, non-invasive estimate of muscle status, but its accuracy is unknown. This study examines the accuracy of upper arm percent muscle area (UAMA) with reference measures of lean mass from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Data are from 120 ARDS survivors participating in a multicenter national study. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, by patient sex, demonstrated that UAMA did no better than chance in discriminating low appendicular skeletal muscle mass identified using DXA findings (c-statistics, 6 months: 0.50-0.59, 12 months: 0.54-0.57). Modest correlations of UAMA with DXA measures (whole-body: r = 0.46-0.49, arm-specific: r = 0.50-0.51, p < 0.001) and Bland-Altman plots indicate poor precision. UAMA is not an appropriate screening measure for estimating muscle mass when compared to a DXA reference standard. Alternate screening measures should be evaluated in ARDS survivors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据