header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Research

THE EFFECT OF SARCOPAENIA ON OUTCOMES FOLLOWING ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

The British Orthopaedic Research Society (BORS) Annual Meeting 2021, held online, 13–14 September 2021.



Abstract

Abstract

Objectives

Sarcopenia is characterised by generalised progressive loss of physical performance, skeletal muscle mass and strength. This systematic review evaluated the effects of sarcopenia on postoperative functional recovery outcomes and mortality in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery and secondarily assessed the methods used to diagnose and define sarcopenia in orthopaedic literature.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar databases according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies involving sarcopenic patients who underwent defined orthopaedic surgery and recorded postoperative outcomes were included. The quality of the criteria by which a sarcopenia diagnosis was made was evaluated and publication quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

A total of 365 studies were identified and screened, 26 full text records were reviewed and 19 publications included in the analysis. Papers reflected a variety of orthopaedic interventions, primarily for elderly trauma or degenerative conditions. Mean follow up was 1.9 years (SD: 1.9 years). There was wide heterogeneity in measurement tools and evaluated parameters across the included papers, however sarcopenia was associated with at least one deleterious effect on surgical outcomes in all 19 studies. Post-operative mortality rate was reported in 11 papers and sarcopenia was associated with poorer survival in 73% (8/11) of them. The most used outcome was the Barthel index (4/19) and sarcopenic patients recorded lower scores in 75% (3/4) of these. Sarcopenia was defined using the gold standard three parameters in 21% (4/19) of studies, using two parameters in 21% (4/19) studies and one in the remaining 58% (11/19). The methodological quality of included papers was moderate to high.

Conclusions

The literature base suffers from heterogeneity in outcomes and classification of sarcopenia diagnosis parameters, however available data suggests that sarcopenia generally increases postoperative mortality and impairs recovery. Sarcopenic patients could be targeted with pre-operative interventions, aiming to improve outcomes.