Is fat mass a better predictor of 6-month survival than muscle mass among African children aged 6-59 months with severe pneumonia?

IF 1.9 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Damalie Nalwanga, Victor Musiime, Sarah Kiguli, Peter Olupot-Olupot, Florence Alaroker, Robert Opoka, Abner Tagoola, Hellen Mnjalla, Christabel Mogaka, Eva Nabawanuka, Elisa Giallongo, Charles Karamagi, André Briend, Kathryn Maitland
{"title":"Is fat mass a better predictor of 6-month survival than muscle mass among African children aged 6-59 months with severe pneumonia?","authors":"Damalie Nalwanga, Victor Musiime, Sarah Kiguli, Peter Olupot-Olupot, Florence Alaroker, Robert Opoka, Abner Tagoola, Hellen Mnjalla, Christabel Mogaka, Eva Nabawanuka, Elisa Giallongo, Charles Karamagi, André Briend, Kathryn Maitland","doi":"10.1186/s40795-024-00939-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pneumonia remains the leading cause of mortality among children under 5 years. Poor nutritional status increases pneumonia mortality. Nutritional status assessed by anthropometry alone does not provide information on which body composition element predicts survival. Body composition proxy measures including arm-fat-area (AFA), arm-muscle-area (AMA), and arm-muscle-circumference (AMC) could be useful predictors.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the ability of fat and muscle mass indices to predict 6-month survival among children with severe pneumonia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective cohort study was nested in the COAST-Nutrition trial (ISRCTN10829073, 06/06/2018) conducted between June 2020 and October 2022 in Uganda and Kenya. We included children aged 6-59 months hospitalized for severe pneumonia with hypoxemia. Children with severe malnutrition, known chronic lung or cardiac diseases were excluded. Anthropometry and clinical status were assessed at enrolment and at follow-up to day 180. We examined Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves of fat and muscle mass indices with 6-month survival as the outcome, and compared the areas under the curve (AUCs) using chi-square tests. Cox survival analysis models assessed time-to-mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 369 participants. The median age was 15-months (IQR 9, 26), and 59.4% (219/369) of participants were male. The baseline measurements were: median MUAC 15.0 cm (IQR 14.0,16.0); arm-fat-area 5.6cm<sup>2</sup> (IQR 4.7, 6.8); arm-muscle-area 11.4cm<sup>2</sup> (IQR 10.0, 12.7); and arm-muscle-circumference 12.2 cm (IQR 11.5, 12.9). Sixteen (4.3%) participants died and 4 (1.1%) were lost-to-follow-up. The AUC for Arm-Fat-Area was not significantly higher than that for Arm-Muscle-Area and Arm-Muscle-Circumference [AUC 0.77 (95%CI 0.64-0.90) vs. 0.61 (95%CI 0.48-0.74), p = 0.09 and 0.63 (95%CI 0.51-0.75), p = 0.16 respectively], but was not statistically different from MUAC (AUC 0.73 (95%CI 0.62-0.85), p = 0.47). Increase in Arm-Fat-Area and Arm-Muscle-Circumference significantly improved survival [aHR 0.40 (95%CI 0.24-0.64), p = < 0.01 and 0.59 (95%CI 0.36-1.06), p = 0.03 respectively]. Survival prediction using Arm-Fat-Area was not statistically different from that of MUAC (p = 0.54).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Muscle mass did not predict 6-month survival better than fat mass in children with severe pneumonia. Fat mass appears to be a better predictor. Effects of fat and muscle could be considered for prognosis and targeted interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":36422,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nutrition","volume":"10 1","pages":"130"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11441138/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-024-00939-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pneumonia remains the leading cause of mortality among children under 5 years. Poor nutritional status increases pneumonia mortality. Nutritional status assessed by anthropometry alone does not provide information on which body composition element predicts survival. Body composition proxy measures including arm-fat-area (AFA), arm-muscle-area (AMA), and arm-muscle-circumference (AMC) could be useful predictors.

Objective: To compare the ability of fat and muscle mass indices to predict 6-month survival among children with severe pneumonia.

Methods: This prospective cohort study was nested in the COAST-Nutrition trial (ISRCTN10829073, 06/06/2018) conducted between June 2020 and October 2022 in Uganda and Kenya. We included children aged 6-59 months hospitalized for severe pneumonia with hypoxemia. Children with severe malnutrition, known chronic lung or cardiac diseases were excluded. Anthropometry and clinical status were assessed at enrolment and at follow-up to day 180. We examined Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves of fat and muscle mass indices with 6-month survival as the outcome, and compared the areas under the curve (AUCs) using chi-square tests. Cox survival analysis models assessed time-to-mortality.

Results: We included 369 participants. The median age was 15-months (IQR 9, 26), and 59.4% (219/369) of participants were male. The baseline measurements were: median MUAC 15.0 cm (IQR 14.0,16.0); arm-fat-area 5.6cm2 (IQR 4.7, 6.8); arm-muscle-area 11.4cm2 (IQR 10.0, 12.7); and arm-muscle-circumference 12.2 cm (IQR 11.5, 12.9). Sixteen (4.3%) participants died and 4 (1.1%) were lost-to-follow-up. The AUC for Arm-Fat-Area was not significantly higher than that for Arm-Muscle-Area and Arm-Muscle-Circumference [AUC 0.77 (95%CI 0.64-0.90) vs. 0.61 (95%CI 0.48-0.74), p = 0.09 and 0.63 (95%CI 0.51-0.75), p = 0.16 respectively], but was not statistically different from MUAC (AUC 0.73 (95%CI 0.62-0.85), p = 0.47). Increase in Arm-Fat-Area and Arm-Muscle-Circumference significantly improved survival [aHR 0.40 (95%CI 0.24-0.64), p = < 0.01 and 0.59 (95%CI 0.36-1.06), p = 0.03 respectively]. Survival prediction using Arm-Fat-Area was not statistically different from that of MUAC (p = 0.54).

Conclusions: Muscle mass did not predict 6-month survival better than fat mass in children with severe pneumonia. Fat mass appears to be a better predictor. Effects of fat and muscle could be considered for prognosis and targeted interventions.

在 6-59 个月大的非洲重症肺炎患儿中,脂肪含量是否比肌肉含量更能预测 6 个月的存活率?
背景:肺炎仍然是 5 岁以下儿童死亡的主要原因。营养状况不良会增加肺炎死亡率。仅通过人体测量法评估营养状况并不能提供有关哪种身体成分可预测存活率的信息。包括手臂脂肪面积(AFA)、手臂肌肉面积(AMA)和手臂肌肉围度(AMC)在内的身体成分替代测量值可能是有用的预测指标:比较脂肪和肌肉质量指数预测重症肺炎患儿 6 个月存活率的能力:这项前瞻性队列研究嵌套于2020年6月至2022年10月在乌干达和肯尼亚开展的COAST-营养试验(ISRCTN10829073,06/06/2018)。我们纳入了因重症肺炎伴低氧血症住院的 6-59 个月大的儿童。患有严重营养不良、已知患有慢性肺病或心脏病的儿童除外。我们在入院时和随访至第 180 天时对儿童的人体测量和临床状况进行了评估。我们以6个月的存活率为结果,检查了脂肪和肌肉质量指数的接收器特征曲线(ROC),并使用卡方检验比较了曲线下面积(AUC)。Cox 生存分析模型评估了死亡时间:我们共纳入了 369 名参与者。年龄中位数为 15 个月(IQR 9,26),59.4%(219/369)的参与者为男性。基线测量值为:MUAC 中位数 15.0 厘米(IQR 14.0,16.0);手臂脂肪面积 5.6 平方厘米(IQR 4.7,6.8);手臂肌肉面积 11.4 平方厘米(IQR 10.0,12.7);手臂肌肉周长 12.2 厘米(IQR 11.5,12.9)。16名参与者(4.3%)死亡,4名(1.1%)失去随访。臂脂肪面积的AUC没有明显高于臂肌肉面积和臂肌肉围[AUC分别为0.77 (95%CI 0.64-0.90) vs. 0.61 (95%CI 0.48-0.74), p = 0.09和0.63 (95%CI 0.51-0.75), p = 0.16],但与MUAC(AUC 0.73 (95%CI 0.62-0.85), p = 0.47)没有统计学差异。臂脂肪面积和臂肌肉围度的增加可显著提高生存率[aHR 0.40 (95%CI 0.24-0.64), p = 结论:肌肉质量并不能预测 6 个月后的生存率:在重症肺炎患儿中,肌肉质量并不比脂肪质量更能预测6个月的存活率。脂肪量似乎是更好的预测指标。脂肪和肌肉的影响可用于预后判断和有针对性的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Nutrition
BMC Nutrition Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
131
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信