RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the most widespread metabolic diseases worldwide, with a significant impact on morbi-mortality. Sarcopenia has a high risk in this population (two times more risk) and a high impact at the functional level, especially in older adults. In addition, it poses enormous challenges in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of this disease concomitantly. The objective is to review the current knowledge on the state of muscle mass and the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of sarcopenia in people with T2DM. METHODS: A bibliographic search was conducted in the PubMed-Medline databases for articles from 2015 with previously defined terms. RESULTS: A loss of muscle mass in older diabetic patients who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition has a proven negative impact on their autonomy and is closely related to the risk of sarcopenia as a high-impact disease, and also with frailty, as an associated multidimensional syndrome. Notably, we found that malnutrition and protein deficiency are often underdiagnosed in obese and overweight T2DM patients. Biochemical markers could help in the future with approaches to managing T2DM and sarcopenia concomitantly. The four essential elements which form the basis of care for patients with diabetes and sarcopenia are pharmacological treatment, nutrition management, regular physical exercise, and correct daily regime. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing prevalence of sarcopenia among older patients with T2DM has significant negative impacts on quality of life and is a public health concern. Effective diagnosis and management require a multidisciplinary approach involving pharmacological treatment, nutrition, exercise, and correct daily regime, with future research needed to understand the underlying mechanisms and improve diagnostic and treatment strategies.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate markers of inflammation, oxidative stress and endothelial function in a disease-related malnutrition (DRM) outpatient population. METHODS: For this cross-sectional study, a total of 83 subjects were included and clustered in 3 groups: 34 with normonutrition (NN), 21 with DRM without inflammation (DRM-I) and 28 with DRM and inflammation (DRM + I). Nutritional diagnosis was conducted for all subjects according to ASPEN. Biochemical parameters, proinflammatory cytokines, reactive oxygen species production, glutathione, mitochondrial membrane potential, oxygen consumption, adhesion molecules and leukocyte-endothelium interactions were evaluated. RESULTS: DRM + I patients showed lower albumin, prealbumin, transferrin, and retinol-binding protein levels with respect to the NN group (p < 0.05), differences that were less noticeable in the DRM-I group. DRM + I was associated with a significant increase in hsCRP and IL6 vs the NN and DRM-I groups, and TNFα was increased in both DRM vs NN. DRM was characterised by increased oxidative stress, which was marked by a significant increase in ROS levels and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential in the DRM + I group. An evident reduction in mitochondrial oxygen consumption and glutathione concentration was observed in both DRM groups, and was accompanied by increased leukocyte adhesion and adhesion molecules and decreased rolling velocity in the DRM + I group. Furthermore, percentage of weight loss was negatively correlated with albumin, prealbumin, transferrin, O2 consumption, glutathione and leukocyte rolling velocity, and positively correlated with hsCRP, IL6, TNFα, ROS, leukocyte adhesion, and VCAM-1. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that DRM is associated with oxidative stress and an inflammatory state, with a deterioration of endothelial dysfunction in the DRM + I population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: nutritional screenings are used to detect nutritional risk, allow early intervention and influence the prognosis. The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) is only validated in hospitalized patients and oncology outpatients. OBJECTIVES: to analyze the nutritional screening MST, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-sf) compared to the nutritional assessment gold standard according to socio-sanitary areas and age groups; and to assess the utility of the MST in those areas where it has not been validated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: a total of 815 outpatient, hospitalized and institutionalized subjects were included in this study. MUST and MST screenings, and nutritional assessment were performed in all subjects. MNA-sf was also performed in subjects ≥ 65 years of age. Nutritional diagnosis was performed according to the SENPE-SEDOM consensus. RESULTS: in the outpatient cohort, three screenings have a validity (AUC ROC) greater than 0.8 compared to nutritional assessment. In the institutionalized, the MNA-sf generates false positives and the MUST is more valid than MST (AUC ROC = 0.815 and 0.763, respectively). In hospitalized patients, there are excellent results with MUST and MST. In all socio-sanitary areas the MST obtains a better positive predictive value. By age groups, MUST and MST are valid tools. CONCLUSIONS: in our study, the MST correctly diagnoses more than 80% of the patients (S = 69.4%, E = 94.2%), and has a good reliability and validity with respect to nutritional assessment not only in hospitalized patients and oncology outpatients, where it has already been validated. In our population, the MST was found to be valid in outpatient, institutionalized and hospitalized subjects.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introducción: los cribados son empleados para detectar el riesgo nutricional y permiten intervenir precozmente e influir en el pronóstico. La herramienta Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) está validada en paciente hospitalizado y oncológico ambulatorio. Objetivo: analizar por ámbitos sociosanitarios y grupos etarios los cribados MST, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) y Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-sf) respecto a la valoración nutricional completa (VNC) como patrón de referencia, y evaluar la utilidad del MST en aquellos ámbitos donde no está validado. Material y métodos: se han incluido 815 sujetos ambulatorios, hospitalizados e institucionalizados. Se les realizó el cribado MUST, MST y una VNC; con los ≥ 65 años también se llevó a cabo el MNA-sf. Se empleó el Consenso SENPE-SEDOM para el diagnóstico. Resultados: en ambulatorios, los tres cribados presentan una validez AUC ROC > 0,8 respecto a la VNC. En los institucionalizados, el MNA-sf genera falsos positivos y el MUST presenta mayor validez que el MST (AUC ROC = 0,815 y 0,763 respectivamente). En hospitalizados, hay excelentes resultados con el MUST y el MST. En los tres ámbitos el MST obtiene mejor valor predictivo positivo. Por rango de edad, tanto el MUST como el MST son herramientas válidas. Conclusiones: en nuestro estudio, el MST diagnostica correctamente a más del 80% de los pacientes (S = 69,4%, E = 94,2%), y posee buena concordancia y validez respecto a la VNC no solo en paciente hospitalizado y oncológico ambulatorio, donde ya había sido validado. En nuestra población, el MST es válido para ser aplicado en pacientes ambulatorios, institucionalizados y hospitalizados

Introduction: nutritional screenings are used to detect nutritional risk, allow early intervention and influence the prognosis. The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) is only validated in hospitalized patients and oncology outpatients. Objectives: to analyze the nutritional screening MST, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-sf) compared to the nutritional assessment gold standard according to socio-sanitary areas and age groups; and to assess the utility of the MST in those areas where it has not been validated. Material and methods: a total of 815 outpatient, hospitalized and institutionalized subjects were included in this study. MUST and MST screenings, and nutritional assessment were performed in all subjects. MNA-sf was also performed in subjects ≥ 65 years of age. Nutritional diagnosis was performed according to the SENPE-SEDOM consensus. Results: in the outpatient cohort, three screenings have a validity (AUC ROC) greater than 0.8 compared to nutritional assessment. In the institutionalized, the MNA-sf generates false positives and the MUST is more valid than MST (AUC ROC = 0.815 and 0.763, respectively). In hospitalized patients, there are excellent results with MUST and MST. In all socio-sanitary areas the MST obtains a better positive predictive value. By age groups, MUST and MST are valid tools. Conclusions: in our study, the MST correctly diagnoses more than 80% of the patients (S = 69.4%, E = 94.2%), and has a good reliability and validity with respect to nutritional assessment not only in hospitalized patients and oncology outpatients, where it has already been validated. In our population, the MST was found to be valid in outpatient, institutionalized and hospitalized subjects

Asunto(s)