Association of head and neck CT-derived sarcopenia with mortality and adverse outcomes: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the association of CT-assessed sarcopenia with adverse outcomes in non-oncological settings. PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize existing literature on the prognostic implications of CT-assessed sarcopenia in non-oncological patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three independent authors searched Medline/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library up to 30 December 2023 for observational studies that reported the presence of sarcopenia defined on CT head and neck in association with mortality estimates and other adverse outcomes, in non-oncological patients. The quality of included studies were assessed using the Quality of Prognostic Studies tool. RESULTS: Overall, 15 studies (3829 participants) were included. Nine studies were at low risk of bias, and six were at moderate risk of bias. Patient populations included those admitted for trauma or treatment of intracranial aneurysms, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, and intracranial stenosis. Sarcopenia was associated with increased 30-day to 2-year mortality in inpatients and patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy or mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. Sarcopenia was also associated with poorer neurological and functional outcomes, increased likelihood of admission to long-term care facilities, and longer duration of hospital stays. The observed associations of sarcopenia with adverse outcomes remained similar across different imaging modalities and methods for quantifying sarcopenia. CONCLUSION: CT-assessed sarcopenia was associated with increased mortality and poorer outcomes across diverse patient populations. Measurement and early identification of sarcopenia in vulnerable patients allows for enhanced prognostication, and focused allocation of resources to mitigate adverse outcomes.

Is underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of colon polyps superior to conventional techniques? A network analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection.

Background and study aims Evidence from recent trials comparing conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) to underwater EMR (UEMR) have matured. However, studies comparing UEMR to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are lacking. Hence, we sought to conduct a comprehensive network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of UEMR, ESD, and EMR. Methods Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to December 2020 for articles comparing UEMR with EMR and ESD. Outcomes of interest included rates of en bloc and complete polyp resection, risk of perforation and bleeding, and local recurrence. A network meta-analysis comparing all three approaches was conducted. In addition, a conventional comparative meta-analysis comparing UEMR to EMR was performed. Analysis was stratified according to polyp sizes (< 10 mm, ≥ 10 mm, and ≥ 20 mm). Results Twenty-two articles were included in this study. For polyps ≥ 10 mm, UEMR was inferior to ESD in achieving en bloc resection ( P  = 0.02). However, UEMR had shorter operating time for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  < 0.001), and ≥20 mm ( P  = 0.019) with reduced perforation risk for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  = 0.05) compared to ESD. In addition, en bloc resection rates were similar between UEMR and EMR, although UEMR had reduced recurrence for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  = 0.013) and ≥ 20 mm ( P  = 0.014). UEMR also had shorter mean operating than EMR for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  < 0.001) and ≥ 20 mm ( P  < 0.001). Risk of bleeding and perforation with UEMR and EMR were similar for polyp of all sizes. Conclusions UEMR has demonstrated technical and oncological outcomes comparable to ESD and EMR, along with a desirable safety profile. UEMR appears to be a safe and effective alternative to conventional methods for resection of polyps ≥ 10 mm.