ArticleHepatology communications2025
Comparing the performance of 3 sarcopenia definitions for predicting adverse events prior to liver transplant.
Article in Hepatology communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Nutrition Landscape in Chronic Liver Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Review
- Defining Sarcopenia in Oncology by CT-Based Muscle Mass: The Clinical and Research Consequences of a Diagnostic Surrogate.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Should nasogastric enteral feeding become a standard escalation to reverse malnutrition in liver transplant candidates?Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSarcopenia is a syndrome of severe muscle wasting, associated with adverse outcomes related to liver transplantation (LT). There are several approaches used to identify sarcopenia. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia using 3 different criteria and determine how these performed in relation to clinical outcomes.
methodsThe cohort study included 237 adults with cirrhosis referred for LT. Sarcopenia was identified using (1) CT-defined; and the (2) original and (3) updated European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People criteria (EWGSOP1 and 2). Logistic regression was used to estimate OR and 95% CI for the relationships between sarcopenia and receiving an LT, unplanned admissions pre-LT, surgical complications, and length of stay for the LT admission. Fine-Gray competing risk analysis explored the impact of sarcopenia on receiving an LT and unplanned admissions. The AUC determined the predictive utility of the criteria.
resultsThe prevalence of CT-defined sarcopenia (52%) was more than twice and 4-fold that of EWGSOP1-defined (22%) and EWGSOP2-defined (11%) sarcopenia, respectively. No criteria demonstrated a significant association with time to LT nor the time to unplanned admissions pre-LT. Similarly, none of the 3 criteria had superior predictive utility for the clinical outcomes for unplanned hospital admissions pre-LT of receiving an LT, with all 3 criteria having identical moderate AUCs for unplanned admissions (0.70) and similar weak AUCs (≤0.55) for the likelihood of receiving an LT.
conclusionsSarcopenia in patients undergoing LT evaluation is prevalent. EWGSOP criteria appear to offer no advantage over CT-only criteria in identifying patients at increased risk of adverse LT outcomes. Bedside measures of muscle function may be of benefit in tracking the effectiveness of interventions targeting sarcopenia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.