Back to Journals » Risk Management and Healthcare Policy » Volume 13

Total Psoas Area Index is Valuable to Assess Sarcopenia, Sarcopenic Overweight/Obesity and Predict Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Open Pancreatoduodenectomy

Authors Xu JY , Li C, Zhang H, Liu Y, Wei JM

Received 10 April 2020

Accepted for publication 26 June 2020

Published 9 July 2020 Volume 2020:13 Pages 761—770

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S257677

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Professor Marco Carotenuto



Jing-Yong Xu,1 Chen Li,2 He Zhang,3 Yuan Liu,2 Jun-Min Wei1

1Department of General Surgery, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Sonography, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, People’s Republic of China; 3Community Health Service Administration Center of Dongcheng District, Beijing 100006, People’s Republic of China

Correspondence: Jun-Min Wei Tel +86-13810351797
Email [email protected]

Background and Aim: Sarcopenia has been proven to be a risk factor after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). We aimed to evaluate if decreased psoas muscle area and density shown in CT scan, as measures for sarcopenia, were associated with postoperative major complications and adverse outcomes in patients who underwent PD.
Patients and Methods: We analyzed 152 consecutive patients who underwent open PD. Total psoas area and muscle attenuation were measured on CT images at the level of the third lumbar vertebra. Total psoas area index (TPAI) was calculated, the cut-off values of TPAI were estimated and validated. The relationship between radiographic characters and outcomes was analyzed.
Results: The optimal cut-off values of TPAI were 4.78 cm2/m2 for males and 3.46 cm2/m2 for females. The values were validated by outcomes with significant differences in the rate of major complications, re-operation, length of stay, and total cost. The prevalence of TPAI-defined sarcopenia and sarcopenic overweight/obesity was 38.8% and 17.1% in total. In multivariate logistic regression, rate of major complications was associated with TPAI [OR=0.605, 95% CI (0.414, 0.883), P=0.009], TPAI-defined sarcopenia [OR=8.256, 95% CI (2.890, 23.583), P=0.000] and sarcopenic overweight/obesity [OR=7.462, 95% CI (2.084, 26.724), P=0.002]; meanwhile, NRS2002-defined nutritional risk and GLIM-defined malnutrition did not show relationship with major complications.
Conclusion: Both sarcopenia and sarcopenic overweight/obesity determined by new TPAI cut-off values were associated with a higher rate of major complications and adverse outcomes in Chinese patients undergoing open PD whereas usual nutritional assessment was not.

Keywords: psoas muscle area index, CT scan, sarcopenia, sarcopenic obesity, pancreatoduodenectomy

Introduction

Open pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is the first choice of treating diseases in the region of the duodenum and pancreatic head. It is a major operation that may cause a high rate of postoperative complications such as pancreatic fistula and hemorrhage, and lead to a prolonged hospital stay and extra financial burden.1 Many risk factors were proved to relate to these adverse events, containing nutritional measurements like malnutrition, sarcopenia, body mass index, and so on.2 However, an international survey showed that 44% of surgeons did not do a preoperative nutritional consultation for their patients undergoing PD and no specific preoperative nutritional thresholds were used.3

Sarcopenia was defined as a “progressive and generalized skeletal muscle disorder” characterized by both loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength, which is proved to be a more independent poor prognostic factor than weight loss and body mass index (BMI) in patients undergoing major abdominal surgeries besides pancreatic surgery.4,5 A recent European consensus definition of sarcopenia described computed tomography (CT) as the gold standard for estimating muscle mass and some research also showed that CT-determined sarcopenia linked to poor outcomes following pancreatic surgery.6,7 Sarcopenic overweight/obesity is another clinical problem characterized by the coexistence of overweight or obesity and sarcopenia which has been proven to be a strong predictor of major complications after pancreatoduodenectomy.8,9 So, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery recommend assessment of both sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity prior to pancreatic surgery.10 However, currently, no universally established definitions, diagnostic criteria, and cutoffs of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity exist, and there has been no paper published in the pancreatic field in the Chinese population.11

In this study, we tried to solve two problems in order to provide some new evidence on radiographic sarcopenia and sarcopenic overweight/obesity: 1) determine and validate the cutoff values of total psoas area index (TPAI) to diagnose CT-determined sarcopenia and sarcopenic overweight/obesity; 2) evaluate the relationship between CT-determined sarcopenia, sarcopenic overweight/obesity, and the occurrence of major complications and adverse outcomes in Chinese patients undergoing open PD.

Patients and Methods

Participants and Basal Data

In total, 161 consecutive patients underwent open PD between January 2016 and December 2018 in the Department of Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery in Beijing Hospital. Among the subjects, 152 cases had complete records of preoperative abdominal and pelvic CT imaging and were retrospectively reviewed. All the operations were done by the same surgeon group. The whole design of this study was shown in the flowchart in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Flowchart of the study.

Baseline variables such as age, gender, history of jaundice and treatment, diabetes, coronary artery disease, hypertension, heavy smoking, and drinking were extracted from original medical records. Preoperative blood tests such as hemoglobin (Hb), lymphocyte, and albumin (Alb) were recorded. Operative basal data included the method of pancreaticojejunostomy (invaginated or duct-to-mucous), pancreatic duct diameter, intraoperative blood loss, blood infusion, fluid infusion, and urine volume. Final pathology reports were used to divide the cases into two stratifications: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma or not and malignancy or not.

The study protocol conformed to the Helsinki declaration and was approved by the local ethics committee of Beijing Hospital including the usage and publication of these retrospectively analyzed data. Due to the blinded data and retrospective design, written informed consent was not considered necessary by the ethics committee (Approval letter No. 2018BJYYEC-196-02).

CT Image Analysis and CT-Determined Sarcopenia Definition

Measurements were performed on precontrast CT scans within two weeks before and after the operation. Since it was proven that the total psoas area at the third lumbar vertebra level correlated well with whole-body skeletal muscle mass, we chose two consecutive images at the middle third lumbar vertebral level to record the average psoas muscle cross-sectional area (total psoas area = left + right) and attenuation recorded the average result (Figure 2).12 Then, the total psoas area index (TPAI) was calculated using the equation: TPAI = total psoas muscle area (cm2)/height (m2).13 The psoas muscle density (PMD) was defined as the mean muscle attenuation in Hounsfield units (HU).14

Figure 2 Computed tomographic images at the the middle third lumbar vertebral level. (A) Sagittal map. (B) Cross-sectional image and red circle shows the outline of psoas.

The CT scans were assessed by two observers. We analyzed 10 different randomly chosen patients to assess the agreements of the two observers by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). The results were excellent for TPA [ICC=0.967, 95% CI (0.874, 0.992)] and for PMD [ICC=0.934, 95% CI (0.759, 0.983)].

Since no in-hospital mortality happened in the female cohort in our database, we performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis by taking the rate of major complications as an indicator for predictive validity to determine the optimal cutoff value of TPAI in both sexes.8,15 Then, we defined “CT-determined sarcopenia” or “TPAI-defined sarcopenia” as less than and equal to the cut-off value of TPAI which we calculated in this study. Meanwhile, we took 24.0 kg/m2 as the diagnosis criteria of overweight, and 28 kg/m2 as the diagnosis criteria of obesity in the Chinese population.16 As in some published studies, sarcopenia with overweight and obesity was analyzed together and a significant association between sarcopenic overweight/obesity with adverse outcomes was proved.9 So in our study, since the number of obesity was too small, we also put overweight and obesity together and defined the patients who were overweight/obese and fulfilled the criteria of CT-determined sarcopenia as “sarcopenic overweight/obesity.”

Nutrition Status Measurements

The nutritional screening was done with NRS2002 within 24 hours after admission. NRS2002 contains three parts: nutritional status impairment, disease severity, and age. If the NRS2002 score is more than or equal to 3, it means “at nutritional risk.”17

The GLIM criteria form the latest published tool to diagnose malnutrition and recommend a two-step model – screening and assessment.18 The patients who were at nutritional risk by NRS 2002 would be assessed to diagnose malnutrition. The assessment step of GLIM criteria contains two parts: phenotypic criteria (three components: BMI, weight loss, and reduced muscle mass) and etiologic criteria (two components: reduced intake and disease burden), and fulfilling at least one component in each part is necessary to diagnose malnutrition. In our study, we used the new estimated cutoff values of TPAI in our study to assess the muscle mass reduction in the GLIM criteria.

In China, parenteral nutrition (PN) was still the most common route of postoperative nutrition support, and artificial nutrition was provided to all patients on postoperative day 2, often beginning with PN.19 PN is defined as intravenous administration of a combination of amino acids, glucose, and fat meeting the recommendation of guidelines.20 The transition from PN to enteral nutrition through tube feeding or oral nutrition supplement depended on the patients’ condition. In any case, the guideline-recommended requirements of energy and protein were well guaranteed.

Clinical and Economic Outcome Measurements

Complications were recorded according to the Claviene–Dindo (CD) classification system (Minor: I–II; Major: III–V).21 Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was defined and graded according to the 2016 ISGPS classification.22 Nonfistulous complications contained cardiac and cerebrovascular events, hemorrhage (both intra-abdominal and gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage), biliary fistula, wound infection, and delayed gastric emptying. Postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS), in-hospital mortality, and total hospital costs were all recorded. Total hospital costs only contained the direct cost from the bill of hospitalization expenses regardless of the reimbursement of insurance, as in our previous published paper.23

Statistics Analysis

The data were collected and checked by two members of staff in our team. Quantitative data are expressed as the mean ±SD, while nominal data are expressed as a percentage. IBM SPSS Statistics (Ver. 20.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used to do the statistical analysis. Categorical data were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher exact test. Continuous data were tested by Student’s unpaired t-test. The cutoff values of TPAI were calculated by maximizing sensitivity and specificity using the Youden index and the areas under the ROC curves were compared.

A logistic regression model was used to evaluate the relationship between risk factors and morbidity of major complications, which was expressed as an OR with 95% confidence intervals. We chose validated risk factors of major complications to be confounding variables to go with TPA, TPAI, PMD, sarcopenia, and sarcopenic overweight/obesity, such as age, BMI, history of diabetes, jaundice, PDAC, malnutrition, albumin, way of anastomosis, pancreatic duct diameter, and intraoperative bleeding.2426 P-values of less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Basal Data

In total, 152 consecutive patients were analyzed in this study with 89 males (58.5%). The mean age was 63.2±11.6 years (16.0–88.0). The mean BMI was 23.5±3.5 kg/m2 (16.6–39.1), with no significant difference between the two genders. Table 1 displays the demographic data of all patients and different genders. For the comorbidity, it was obvious that men consumed more alcohol and cigarettes than women. The prevalence of nutritional risk and malnutrition was 69.7% and 56.6%, respectively; and 28.3% of cases suffered from pancreatic cancer. The male patients possessed more major complications, more re-operations, and higher costs than female patients, with statistical significance, and longer length of stay but without significance. Table 1 also showed that the TPA, TPAI, and PMD decreased after the operation with statistical significance.

Table 1 Demographic and Clinical Data

Estimation and Validation of the Reference Values of TPAI

In total, 152 cases were enrolled between 2016 and 2018. According to recruited date, the first 40 consecutive male cases and the first 40 consecutive female cases were withdrawn to form estimation groups. Table 2 and Figure 3 display the results of ROC analysis that indicated TPAIs of 4.78 cm2/m2 for male patients and 3.46 cm2/m2 for female patients were the optimal cutoff points for predicting major complications with statistical significance.

Table 2 Estimation of the Cutoff Values of TPAI

Figure 3 Receiver operating characteristic curves of TPAI for major complications. (A) For males. (B) For females.

Then, we did validation in total participants and divided the patients into sarcopenia and normal groups according to the cutoff point in three cohorts: all patients, males, and females (Table 3). In all three cohorts, the cutoff values showed excellent results in distinguishing major complications with significant differences. In total and male groups, the differences between the re-operation rate, total cost, and length of stay were significant. Though significant differences were not found in the female group, the re-operation rate and length of stay were even higher than the no sarcopenia groups. So, the cutoff values were validated to be used to define sarcopenia.

Table 3 Comparison of Outcomes in Different Sarcopenic Cohorts

Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic Overweight/Obesity

Based on the validated cut-off values of TPAI, the prevalences of CT-determined sarcopenia were 38.8% in total, 34.8% in males, and 44.4% in females (Table 1). According to the age, we divided the patients into age ≥65 and <65 groups. The prevalence of CT-determined sarcopenia was significantly higher in the elderly group (48.5% vs 31.4%, p = 0.032).

In our study, we used simple criteria to diagnose sarcopenic overweight/obesity: (1) BMI ≥24kg/m2 and (2) TPAI ≤4.78 cm2/m2 for males or ≤3.46 cm2/m2 for females. According to this, the prevalences of sarcopenic overweight/obesity were 17.1% in total, 15.7% in males, and 19.0% in females, with no difference between the two genders (Table 1). Table 3 shows that the morbidity of major complications, the rate of re-operation, length of stay, and total cost were significantly higher in the sarcopenic overweight/obesity group than the normal group. The in-hospital mortality was worse in the sarcopenic overweight/obesity group, without statistical significance.

Logistic Regression Between Sarcopenia and Major Complications

Table 4 shows the univariate and multivariate logistic regression results for the risk of major complications. After adjusting for confounding variables calculated in univariate analysis (hemoglobin, albumin, method of anastomosis, diameter of pancreatic duct, and intraoperative hemorrhage), multivariate logistic regression analyses were done to evaluate TPA, TPAI, TPAI-defined sarcopenia, and sarcopenic overweight/obesity. The odds ratios of major complications were significantly associated with all four items. However, the traditional nutrition screening (NRS2002) and assessment (GLIM) tools were not proven to be associated with major complications.

Table 4 Association Between Different Covariates and Rate of Major Complications

Discussion

Sarcopenia is a clinical status with progressive loss of skeletal muscle mass, strength, and function, which may increase the risk of adverse outcomes. The prevalence of sarcopenia is 5–10% in the elderly (>65 years old).27 Sarcopenia can be either a primary syndrome such as in the elderly or secondary to malignancy, so screening of sarcopenia should be taken into consideration in all patients at risk. In our study, the prevalence of sarcopenia was 38.3% in all patients and 48.5%, in patients >65 years old, which were much higher figures than in the average population but similar to some pancreatic cohorts (48–65.3%).2830 We thought it was partly due to aging and pancreas-related problems, and the other reason was that the parameters chosen to diagnose sarcopenia were different between studies and might affect the prevalence.

There are many tools to diagnose and assess sarcopenia.31 One core item is to evaluate muscle mass. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and bioelectrical impedance analysis were both direct ways to assess body composition,32 but they are complex and not widely available in many clinical settings. So, we need more easily available and practical parameters. A European consensus recommended CT and magnetic resonance imaging to be gold standards to evaluate reduced muscle mass, which was defined as “radiographic sarcopenia.”6 Radiographic sarcopenia has been proven to be associated with poor outcomes after pancreatectomy.33,34 Many validated parameters in CT scan were published, including the parameters of muscle mass, such as skeletal muscle index (SMI), total psoas area (TPA), total psoas area index (TPAI), psoas muscle thickness, and parameters of muscle quality, such as muscle Hounsfield Units.3538 Some parameters were difficult to measure, and relied on the CT phase or were variable among researchers. So we chose TPAI, which was TPA adjusted for height, and was validated and easier to measure than total skeletal muscle. The ICC analysis in our study showed a high degree of consistency between different researchers.

Unfortunately, the cutoffs for diagnosing sarcopenia are not well defined. When using parameters of psoas, in some studies, sarcopenia was defined as less than the lowest tertile or quartile of total psoas area,12 while, in others, some proposed definitions were used.39 However, the standardized values must be adjusted based on population characteristics and whether the values can predict adverse clinical outcomes should be treated as a golden standard. So we performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis by taking the rate of major complications as an indicator for predictive validity to determine the optimal cutoff value of TPAI in both genders.8 TPAI values of 4.78 cm2/m2 for male patients and 3.46 cm2/m2 for female patients were the optimal cut-off points for predicting major complications with statistical significance. And validation was done in a larger amount of patients (Table 3). So the diagnoses of TPA, TPAI, CT-determined sarcopenia, sarcopenic overweight/obesity, and GLIM-determined malnutrition were all based on these sex-specific values in our study. The multivariable regression analyses revealed the significant association between lower TPAI, sarcopenia, and more major complications, whereas the commonly used nutritional screening and assessment tools (NRS2002 and GLIM) were not significantly associated. Moreover, due to surgical attack, though guideline-recommended nutrition support was administrated, there was still a sharp reduction of muscle mass, manifesting as the decrease of TPA, TPAI, and muscle attenuation.

Sarcopenic obesity is a subset of sarcopenia. It possesses the characters of both loss of skeletal muscle mass and an increase in adipose tissue mass which is often defined as increased BMI.40 Currently, the definitions, diagnostic criteria, and cutoffs are not universally established, which significantly affected the prevalence and sensitivity study for any disease risk prediction.11 So in our study, we put overweight and obesity together and made simple criteria to diagnose sarcopenic overweight/obesity: (1) BMI ≥24kg/m2 and (2) TPAI ≤4.78 cm2/m2 for males or ≤3.46 cm2/m2 for females. The prevalence was 17.1% in total patients. Multivariable analysis showed that it was an independent predictor of increased rate of major complications. Our result is similar to Okumura’s study of pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC, in which the sarcopenic obesity group had higher major complications (OR 3.2, p=0.008),39 but in his study, the obesity was assessed by visceral to subcutaneous adipose tissue area obtained from CT images.

Muscle quality can also be quantified on imaging. Muscle Hounsfield units measured on CT scans can be used to predict muscle density, which represents the intra-muscular adipose infiltration.41 It has been shown to correlate with adverse outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery,7,42 but in our study, we did not find an association between lower muscle density and worse outcomes. But PMD decreased significantly after the operation, which represented higher fat infiltration in muscle or myosteatosis because of the inflammation-induced consumption of muscle protein and fat deposition.43

There are some limitations in our study: 1) It was a retrospective observational study in a single center. 2) We had a relatively small sample size, so it is difficult to do further analysis by stratification and difficult to perform standard external validation of the cutoff values of TPAI. 3) Although it is ideal to determine the cutoff values in the normal population, in our study we determined cutoff values in a certain population based on ROC curves. So it is important to validate whether our cutoff values are adequate to define low muscle mass.

However, to our knowledge, the present study is the first assessment of the prognostic significance of CT-determined sarcopenia in patients undergoing PD in the Chinese population. A larger, prospective, and multicenter study is necessary to verify our results in the future.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all individuals who participated in this study and the nursing staff for their assistance in the data collection.

Disclosure

The authors declare that the article is original, is not under consideration for publication anywhere else and has not been previously published. The authors declare no conflicts of interest, or financial disclosures.

References

1. Witkowski ER, Smith JK, Tseng JF. Outcomes following resection of pancreatic cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2013;107(1):97–103. doi:10.1002/jso.23267

2. Peng P, Hyder O, Firoozmand A, et al. Impact of sarcopenia on outcomes following resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(8):1478–1486. doi:10.1007/s11605-012-1923-5

3. Martin D, Joliat GR, Halkic N, Demartines N, Schäfer M. Perioperative nutritional management of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy: an international survey among surgeons. HPB (Oxford). 2020;22(1):75–82. doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2019.05.009

4. Gianotti L, Sandini M. The 2019 ESPEN arvid wretlind lecture perioperative nutritional and metabolic care: patient-tailored or organ-specific approach? Clin Nutr. 2019;S0261-5614(19)33122-X. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2019.10.029

5. Englesbe MJ, Terjimanian MN, Lee JS, et al. Morphometric age and surgical risk. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(5):976–985. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.01.052

6. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, et al. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European working group on sarcopenia in older people. Age Ageing. 2010;39(4):412–423. doi:10.1093/ageing/afq034

7. Namm JP, Thakrar KH, Wang CH, et al. A semi-automated assessment of sarcopenia using psoas area and density predicts outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic malignancy. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2017;8(6):936–944. doi:10.21037/jgo.2017.08.09

8. Sandini M, Bernasconi DP, Fior D, et al. A high visceral adipose tissue-to-skeletal muscle ratio as a determinant of major complications after pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer. Nutrition. 2016;32(11–12):1231–1237. doi:10.1016/j.nut.2016.04.002

9. Tan BH, Birdsell LA, Martin L, Baracos VE, Fearon KC. Sarcopenia in an overweight or obese patient is an adverse prognostic factor in pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(22):6973–6979. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1525

10. Gianotti L, Besselink MG, Sandini M, et al. Nutritional support and therapy in pancreatic surgery: a position paper of the international study group on pancreatic surgery (ISGPS). Surgery. 2018;164(5):1035–1048. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2018.05.040

11. Donini LM, Busetto L, Bauer JM, et al. Critical appraisal of definitions and diagnostic criteria for sarcopenic obesity based on a systematic review. Clin Nutr. 2019:S0261-5614(19)33151–6. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2019.11.024.

12. Onesti JK, Wright GP, Kenning SE, et al. Sarcopenia and survival in patients undergoing pancreatic resection. Pancreatology. 2016;16(2):284–289. doi:10.1016/j.pan.2016.01.009

13. Mourtzakis M, Prado CM, Lieffers JR, Reiman T, McCargar LJ, Baracos VE. A practical and precise approach to quantification of body composition in cancer patients using computed tomography images acquired during routine care. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2008;33(5):997–1006. doi:10.1139/H08-075

14. Yamashita M, Kamiya K, Matsunaga A, et al. Prognostic value of psoas muscle area and density in patients who undergo cardiovascular surgery. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33:1652–1659. doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2017.10.009

15. Chang JS, Kim TH, Kim H, Choi EH, Kim N, Kong ID. Qualitative muscle mass index as a predictor of skeletal muscle function deficit in Asian older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2017;17(1):99–107. doi:10.1111/ggi.12681

16. Yang ZX, Zhao WH, Zhai Y, Chen CM. Prediction on the prevalence of obesity by mean value of body mass index of population. Chin J Epidemiol. 2006;27:566–569.

17. Kondrup J, Alison SP, Elia M, Vellas B, Plauth M. Educational and clinical practice committee, European society of parenteral and enteral nutrition (ESPEN). ESPEN guidelines for nutrition screening 2002. Clin Nutr. 2003;2(4):415–421. doi:10.1016/S0261-5614(03)00098-0

18. Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition - a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):1–9. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.002

19. Xu JY, Zhang AR, Tang BJ, et al. Modification of a new subclassification of grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula: a bicenter retrospective cohort study. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2020. doi:10.1002/jhbp.780

20. Braga M, Ljungqvist O, Soeters P, Fearon K, Weimann A, Bozzetti F. ESPEN. ESPEN guidelines on parenteral nutrition: surgery. Clin Nutr. 2009;28(4):378–386. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2009.04.002

21. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–213. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae

22. Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, et al. The 2016 update of the international study group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery. 2017;161(3):584–591. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014

23. Xu JY, Zhu MW, Zhang H, et al. A cross-sectional study of GLIM-defined malnutrition based on new validated calf circumference cut-off values and different screening tools in hospitalized patients over 70 years old. J Nutr Health Aging. 2020. doi:10.1007/s12603-020-1386-4

24. Vallance AE, Young AL, Macutkiewicz C, Roberts KJ, Smith AM. Calculating the risk of a pancreatic fistula after a pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review. HPB (Oxford). 2015;17(11):1040–1048. doi:10.1111/hpb.12503

25. Winter JM, Cameron JL, Campbell KA, et al. Does pancreatic duct stenting decrease the rate of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized trial. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10(9):1280–1290. doi:10.1016/j.gassur.2006.07.020

26. Kakita A, Yoshida M, Takahashi T. History of pancreaticojejunostomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy: development of a more reliable anastomosis technique. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2001;8(3):230–237. doi:10.1007/s005340170022

27. Anker SD, Morley JE, von Haehling S. Welcome to the ICD-10 code for sarcopenia. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016;7(5):512–514. doi:10.1002/jcsm.12147

28. Di Sebastiano KM, Yang L, Zbuk K, et al. Accelerated muscle and adipose tissue loss may predict survival in pancreatic cancer patients: the relationship with diabetes and anaemia. Br J Nutr. 2013;28(109):302–312. doi:10.1017/S0007114512001067

29. Nishida Y, Kato Y, Kudo M, et al. Preoperative sarcopenia strongly influences the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula formation after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(9):1586–1594. doi:10.1007/s11605-016-3146-7

30. Pecorelli N, Carrara G, De Cobelli F, et al. Effect of sarcopenia and visceral obesity on mortality and pancreatic fistula following pancreatic cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2016;103(4):434–442. doi:10.1002/bjs.10063

31. Dent E, Morley JE, Cruz-Jentoft AJ, et al. International clinical practice guidelines for sarcopenia (ICFSR): screening, diagnosis and management. J Nutr Health Aging. 2018;22(10):1148–1161. doi:10.1007/s12603-018-1139-9

32. Yoshida D, Shimada H, Park H, et al. Development of an equation for estimating appendicular skeletal muscle mass in Japanese older adults using bioelectrical impedance analysis. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2014;14(4):851–857. doi:10.1111/ggi.12177

33. Takagi K, Yoshida R, Yagi T, et al. Radiographic sarcopenia predicts postoperative infectious complications in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. BMC Surg. 2017;17(1):64. doi:10.1186/s12893-017-0261-7

34. Ratnayake CB, Loveday BP, Shrikhande SV, Windsor JA, Pandanaboyana S. Impact of preoperative sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes following pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pancreatology. 2018;18(8):996–1004. doi:10.1016/j.pan.2018.09.011

35. Dodson RM, Firoozmand A, Hyder O, et al. Impact of sarcopenia on outcomes following intra-arterial therapy of hepatic malignancies. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17(12):2123–2132. doi:10.1007/s11605-013-2348-5

36. Psutka SP, Carrasco A, Schmit GD, et al. Sarcopenia in patients with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy: impact on cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. Cancer. 2014;120(18):2910–2918. doi:10.1002/cncr.28798

37. Durand F, Buyse S, Francoz C, et al. Prognostic value of muscle atrophy in cirrhosis using psoas muscle thickness on computed tomography. J Hepatol. 2014;60(6):1151–1157. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2014.02.026

38. Aubrey J, Esfandiari N, Baracos VE, et al. Measurement of skeletal muscle radiation attenuation and basis of its biological variation. Acta Physiol (Oxf). 2014;210(3):489–497. doi:10.1111/apha.12224

39. Hamaguchi Y, Kaido T, Okumura S, et al. Proposal for new diagnostic criteria for low skeletal muscle mass based on computed tomography imaging in Asian adults. Nutrition. 2016;32(11–12):1200–1205. doi:10.1016/j.nut.2016.04.003

40. Muscaritoli M, Anker SD, Argilés J, et al. Consensus definition of sarcopenia, cachexia and pre-cachexia: joint document elaborated by Special Interest Groups(SIG) “cachexiaanorexia in chronic wasting diseases” and “nutrition in geriatrics”. Clin Nutr. 2010;29(2):154. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2009.12.004

41. Okumura S, Kaido T, Hamaguchi Y, et al. Visceral adiposity and sarcopenic visceral obesity are associated with poor prognosis after resection of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(12):3732–3740. doi:10.1245/s10434-017-6077-y

42. Sur MD, Namm JP, Hemmerich JA, Buschmann MM, Roggin KK, Dale W. Radiographic sarcopenia and self-reported exhaustion independently predict NSQIP serious complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy in older adults. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(12):3897–3904. doi:10.1245/s10434-015-4763-1

43. Stretch C, Aubin JM, Mickiewicz B, et al. Sarcopenia and myosteatosis are accompanied by distinct biological profiles in patients with pancreatic and periampullary adenocarcinomas. PLoS One. 2018;13(5):e0196235. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0196235

Creative Commons License © 2020 The Author(s). This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.