Annals of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism : eISSN 2799-8363 / pISSN 2799-7898

Table. 2.

Table. 2.

Tools to assess sarcopenia

Method Advantages Disadvantages Summary
BIA Safe, rapid, accessible, minimal-moderate training, repeatable Strict parameters around nutritional intake and exercise before the test, positioning is challenging in patients with obesity Fluid retention can impact the reliability of lean body mass estimates. Data using phase angle show good reliability even in patients with fluid retention.
MRI Accurate, no radiation, measures muscle quantity and quality Costly, limited availablity Muscle mass is defined by fat-free muscle areas.
DEXA Safe, rapid Radiation exposure (low), edema can limit accuracy Low concordance between DEXA and CT in patients with cirrhosis; DEXA appendicular mass improves accuracy in comparison to CT.
CT Accurate, rapid, measures muscle quantity and quality, requires a high level of training to interpret findings Radiation exposure, not available at bedside, varying cut-points/sites of measurement, not easily repeatable The majority of evidence supports diagnostic use but includes challenges with radiation exposure and repeatability.

Adapted from an article by Lai et al. (Hepatology 2021;74:1611-44) [5] with original copyright holder’s permission.

BIA = bioelectrical impedance analysis; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; DEXA = dual energy x-ray absorptiometry; CT = computed tomography.

Ann Clin Nutr Metab 2022;14:2-9 https://doi.org/10.15747/ACNM.2022.14.1.2
© 2022 Ann Clin Nutr Metab