Back

Utility of ultrasound in assessing Sarcopenia in patients with cirrhosis: A Cross-Sectional study.

Gaur, S.; Dhar, M.; Sharma, A.; Malik, S. S.; Bairwa, M. C.; Pathania, M.

2025-05-27 gastroenterology
10.1101/2025.05.22.25328126 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSarcopenia is a frequent complication of cirrhosis and is closely linked with adverse medical consequences. This study evaluated relationship between the Quadriceps Muscle Index (QMI), measured via ultrasound, and the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, as well as handgrip strength (HGS) and determine the cut off of QMI that will predict sarcopenia. MethodologyThe cross-sectional observational study was carried out at a tertiary care teaching hospital from northern India. Patients having cirrhosis were screened based on predefined eligibility criteria. The assessment followed a multi-step approach, including cirrhosis severity evaluation using the MELD score, muscle mass measurement via the ultrasound-derived Quadriceps Muscle Index (QMI), and muscle strength assessment using hand grip dynamometry and sarcopenia diagnosis using European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older people 2 (EWGSOP 2) criteria. ResultsThe study involved 102 patients with cirrhosis. The correlation analysis found moderate negative association among the MELD score and QMI (Spearman rho = - 0.55, p < 0.001). Similarly, substantial positive connection was reported between HGS and QMI (Pearson r = 0.63, p < 0.001). At a cutoff of QMI (cm/m2) [&le;]1.65 cm/m2 for males and [&le;]1.59 cm/m2 for females found to predict sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients. ConclusionsPresent study highlights the Quadriceps Muscle Index (QMI) as a reliable and clinically relevant tool for assessing sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients. The significant correlation between QMI and the MELD score underscores its potential for identifying patients at risk of complications of cirrhosis.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.