Global epidemiological features and impact of osteosarcopenia: A comprehensive meta‐analysis and systematic review
Shanping Chen,Xiao Xu,Huping Gong,Ruzhao Chen,Lijuan Guan,Xuedan Yan,Lihua Zhou,Yongxue Yang,Jiang Wang,Jianghua Zhou,Chuan Zou,Pan Huang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.13392
2023-12-14
Journal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle
Abstract:Osteosarcopenia is defined as the concurrent occurrence of osteopenia/osteoporosis and sarcopenia. The aim of the current study was to perform a systematic review with meta‐analysis to determine the global prevalence, risk factors and clinical outcomes of osteosarcopenia. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022351229). PubMed, Cochrane, Medline and Embase were searched from inception to February 2023 to retrieve eligible observational population‐based studies. Pooled osteosarcopenia prevalence was calculated with 95% confidence interval (CI), and subgroup analyses were performed. The risk factor of osteosarcopenia and its association with clinical outcomes were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR), respectively. Heterogeneity was estimated using the I2 test. Study quality was assessed using validated instruments matched to study designs. The search identified 55 158 studies, and 66 studies (64 404 participants, mean age from 46.6 to 93 years) were analysed in the final analysis, including 48 cross‐sectional studies, 17 cohort studies and 1 case–control study. Overall, the pooled prevalence of osteosarcopenia was 18.5% (95% CI: 16.7–20.3, I2 = 98.7%), including 15.3% (95% CI: 13.2–17.4, I2 = 97.6%) in men and 19.4% (95% CI: 16.9–21.9, I2 = 98.5%) in women. The prevalence of osteosarcopenia diagnosed using sarcopenia plus osteopenia/osteoporosis was 20.7% (95% CI: 17.1–24.4, I2 = 98.55%), and the prevalence of using sarcopenia plus osteoporosis was 16.1% (95% CI: 13.3–18.9, I2 = 98.0%). The global osteosarcopenia prevalence varied in different regions with 22.9% in Oceania, 21.6% in Asia, 20.8% in South America, 15.7% in North America and 10.9% in Europe. A statistically significant difference was found in the subgroups of the study population between the hospital (24.7%) and community (12.9%) (P = 0.001). Frailty (OR = 4.72, 95% CI: 2.71–8.23, I2 = 61.1%), malnutrition (OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.62–3.40, I2 = 50.0%), female sex (OR = 5.07, 95% CI: 2.96–8.69, I2 = 73.0%) and higher age (OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.06–1.15, I2==86.0%) were significantly associated with a higher risk for osteosarcopenia. Meta‐analysis of cohort studies showed that osteosarcopenia significantly increased the risk of fall (HR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.20–1.97; I2 = 1.0%, three studies), fracture (HR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.61–2.81; I2 = 67.8%, seven studies) and mortality (HR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.34–2.28; I2 = 0.0%, five studies). Despite the heterogeneity arising from varied definitions and criteria, our findings highlight a significant global prevalence of osteosarcopenia and its negative impact on clinical health. Standardizing diagnostic criteria for osteosarcopenia would be advantageous in the future, and early detection and management should be emphasized in this patient population.
medicine, general & internal,geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology