학술논문
Diagnostic performance of nutritional indicators in patients with heart failure
Document Type
Report
Author
Kinugasa, Yoshiharu; Sota, Takeshi; Kamitani, Hiroko; Nakayama, Natsuko; Nakamura, Kensuke; Hirai, Masayuki; Yanagihara, Kiyotaka; Kato, Masahiko; Ono, Taisuke; Takahashi, Masashige; Matsuo, Hisashi; Matsukawa, Ryuichi; Yoshida, Ichiro; Kakinoki, Shigeo; Yonezawa, Kazuya; Himura, Yoshihiro; Yokota, Takashi; Yamamoto, Kazuhiro; Tsuchihashi‐Makaya, Miyuki; Kinugawa, Shintaro
Source
ESC Heart Failure. August 2022, Vol. 9 Issue 4, p2096, 11 p.
Subject
Language
English
Abstract
Introduction As society ages, the number of older and frail patients with heart failure (HF) is increasing worldwide.[sup.1,2] Malnutrition is common in HF patients with frailty and is associated with [...]
: Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of the nutritional indicators, the mini nutritional assessment‐short form (MNA‐SF), the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), and the controlling nutritional status (CONUT), in heart failure (HF) patients. Methods and results: Nutritional status was prospectively assessed by the aforementioned three nutritional indicators in 150 outpatients with HF who were then followed for 1 year. The prevalence of patients with the nutritional risk as assessed by the MNA‐SF, GNRI, and CONUT scores was 50.0%, 13.3%, and 54.0%, respectively. There was slight agreement of nutritional risk assessment between the MNA‐SF and GNRI scores (κ coefficient = 0.16), as well as the GNRI and CONUT scores (κ = 0.11), but poor agreement between the MNA‐SF and CONUT scores (κ = −0.09). The CONUT score had the lowest area under the curve (AUC) for the identification of low body weight, low muscle mass, and low physical function among the three indicators (all P < 0.05). Compared with the MNA‐SF score, both the GNRI and CONUT scores had lower AUCs for the identification of reduced dietary intake and weight loss (all P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in predicting all‐cause mortality or HF rehospitalization among the three indicators. The prescription of statins reduced the diagnostic performance of the CONUT score, as the CONUT score includes cholesterol level assessment. Conclusions: Of the three indicators, the diagnostic ability of the MNA‐SF score was the highest, and that of the CONUT score was the lowest, for the assessment of HF patient nutritional status. The CONUT score may misrepresent nutritional status, particularly in patients receiving statins.
: Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of the nutritional indicators, the mini nutritional assessment‐short form (MNA‐SF), the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), and the controlling nutritional status (CONUT), in heart failure (HF) patients. Methods and results: Nutritional status was prospectively assessed by the aforementioned three nutritional indicators in 150 outpatients with HF who were then followed for 1 year. The prevalence of patients with the nutritional risk as assessed by the MNA‐SF, GNRI, and CONUT scores was 50.0%, 13.3%, and 54.0%, respectively. There was slight agreement of nutritional risk assessment between the MNA‐SF and GNRI scores (κ coefficient = 0.16), as well as the GNRI and CONUT scores (κ = 0.11), but poor agreement between the MNA‐SF and CONUT scores (κ = −0.09). The CONUT score had the lowest area under the curve (AUC) for the identification of low body weight, low muscle mass, and low physical function among the three indicators (all P < 0.05). Compared with the MNA‐SF score, both the GNRI and CONUT scores had lower AUCs for the identification of reduced dietary intake and weight loss (all P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in predicting all‐cause mortality or HF rehospitalization among the three indicators. The prescription of statins reduced the diagnostic performance of the CONUT score, as the CONUT score includes cholesterol level assessment. Conclusions: Of the three indicators, the diagnostic ability of the MNA‐SF score was the highest, and that of the CONUT score was the lowest, for the assessment of HF patient nutritional status. The CONUT score may misrepresent nutritional status, particularly in patients receiving statins.