Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 2 Sarcopenia and liver frailty assessment in study population groups

From: Dysgeusia in MASLD-related advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD): a silent driver towards the “Bermuda” triangle of malnutrition-sarcopenia-frailty severely affecting prognosis

Sarcopenia assessment

 < F3

(n:60)

cACLD

(n:70)

dACLD

(n:70)

p-value* of the comparison between the liver-disease stages

Muscle quantity (a)

ASM/h2

(mean ± SD)

9.89 ± 1.18

7.66 ± 1.08

6.31 ± 0.71

 < F3 vs cACLD: p < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

Muscle strength (b)

 < F3

(n:60)

cACLD

(n:70)

dACLD

(n:70)

p-value* of the comparison between the liver-disease stages

HGT (Kg)

(mean ± SD)

32.26 ± 1.44

28.54 ± 0.81

20.12 ± 2.67

 < F3 vs cACLD: p < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

Chair stand (sec)

(mean ± SD)

11.12 ± 0.58

11.94 ± 1.25

16.75 ± 1.70

 < F3 vs cACLD: p < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

Physical performance (c)

 < F3

(n:60)

cACLD

(n:70)

dACLD

(n:70)

p-value* of the comparison between the liver-disease stages

SPBB (total score)

(mean ± SD)

10.48 ± 0.98

9.85 ± 1.05

4.37 ± 1.71

 < F3 vs cACLD: p: 0.0012

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

TUG (sec)

(mean ± SD)

9.62 ± 0.89

15.25 ± 2.13

21.05 ± 1.17

 < F3 vs cACLD: p < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

Gait speed test (m/s)

(mean ± SD)

1.26 ± 0.10

0.89 ± 0.07

0.66 ± 0.17

 < F3 vs cACLD: p < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

Prevalence of sarcopenia

 < F3

(n:60)

cACLD

(n:70)

dACLD

(n:70)

p-value** of the comparison between the liver-disease stages

Number (%)

of patients

3 (5%)

14 (20%)

41 (58.57%)

 < F3 vs cACLD: p < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p < 0.0001

Liver frailty assessment

 < F3

(n:60)

cACLD

(n:70)

dACLD

(n:70)

p-value of the comparison between the liver-disease stages

LFI (mean ± SD)

3.04 ± 0.08

3.47 ± 0.29

5.23 ± 0.46

 < F3 vs cACLD: p* < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p* < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p* < 0.0001

Frail patients

(number and %)

5 (8.33%)

18 (25.71%)

39 (55.71%)

 < F3 vs cACLD: p** < 0.0001

cACLD vs dACLD: p** < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p** < 0.0001

Pre-frail patients

(number and %)

15 (25%)

22 (31.43%)

23 (32.86%)

 < F3 vs cACLD: n.s.**

cACLD vs dACLD: n.s.**

 < F3 vs dACLD: n.s.**

No-frail patients

(number and %)

40 (66.67%)

30 (42.8%)

8 (11.43%)

 < F3 vs cACLD: p**0.0082

cACLD vs dACLD: p** < 0.0001

 < F3 vs dACLD: p** < 0.0001

  1. ASM appendicular skeletal mass, h2 the square of the height, HGT hand-grip test, SPBB short physical performance battery, TUG timed-up and go, LFI liver frailty index, SD standard deviation,  ≤ F3 mild-advanced fibrosis, ACLD advanced chronic liver disease, cACLD compensated advanced chronic liver disease, dACLD decompensated advanced chronic liver disease
  2. *Mann–Whitney U test
  3. **Chi-square test analysis; statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) are reported in bold
Back to article page

Nutrition Journal

ISSN: 1475-2891

Contact us