1.
Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index Predicts Adverse Outcomes in Human Malignancy: A Meta-Analysis.
Lv, GY, An, L, Sun, DW
Disease markers. 2019;:4796598
Abstract
BACKGROUND Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) has been widely used to assess the nutritional status in a variety of human pathological conditions, but the prognostic value of the GNRI in malignancies has not been evinced. METHODS Relevant studies updated on Jul 27, 2019, were retrieved in available databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Chinese CNKI, and Chinese Wan-fang. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled by using STATA 14. RESULTS A total of 15 studies involving 8,046 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results evinced that low GNRI was associated with poor OS (HR = 1.95, 95% CI: 1.49-2.56, p ≤ 0.001), poor CSS (HR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.49-2.19, p ≤ 0.001), poor DFS (HR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.28-2.17, p ≤ 0.001), and poor PFS (HR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.28-2.21, p ≤ 0.001), and the correlation of GNRI with OS was not changed when stratified by possible confounding factors, suggesting that malignancy patients with low GNRI would suffer from reduced survival rate and increased recurrence rate. Moreover, low GNRI was also associated with postoperative complications in malignancies. CONCLUSIONS In summary, GNRI is associated poor prognosis in human malignancies, and GNRI should be used as a predictive indicator of adverse outcomes during malignancy treatment.
2.
Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a predictor for mortality: a meta-analysis of observational studies.
Hao, X, Li, D, Zhang, N
Nutrition research (New York, N.Y.). 2019;:8-20
Abstract
The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) is a valuable simplified tool to predict mortality. However, the results of previous studies are inconsistent and controversial. To summarize the evidence regarding the association of GNRI levels with the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality, we conducted this meta-analysis. Relevant studies were identified through a systematic electronic literature search. We estimated combined hazard ratios (HRs) to assess the association between GNRI and the risk of mortality by using a meta-analysis method. The Cochrane Q test and the inconsistency statistic were used to assess the between-study heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed. Twenty-six observational studies involving 17 097 participants were identified in this meta-analysis. With the highest category used as the reference group, the lowest-category GNRI was significantly associated with an increased risk of all-cause (HR: 1.32, 95% confidence interval: 1.22-1.43) and CV (HR = 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.72-2.57) mortality. Subgroup analyses based on the participant ethnicity, age, and the duration of the follow-up period did not substantially change the main results. In summary, a lower GNRI is associated with an elevated risk of both all-cause and CV mortality. Given the significant heterogeneity among the included studies, further investigations with larger sample sizes are required to confirm the value of the GNRI in predicting mortality and to explore the combined effects of malnutrition and mortality.
3.
Association of Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index with Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.
Xiong, J, Wang, M, Zhang, Y, Nie, L, He, T, Wang, Y, Huang, Y, Feng, B, Zhang, J, Zhao, J
Kidney & blood pressure research. 2018;(6):1878-1889
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) was developed as a "nutrition-related" risk index and was reported in different populations as associated with the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Therefore, GNRI can be used to classify patients according to a risk of complications in relation to conditions associated with protein-energy wasting (PEW). However, not all reports pointed to the prognostic ability of the GNRI. The purpose of this study was to assess the associations of GNRI with mortality in chronic hemodialysis patients. METHODS We electronically searched original articles published in peer-reviewed journals from their inception to September 2018 in The PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. The primary outcome was all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. We pooled unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using Review Manager 5.3 software. RESULTS A total of 10,739 patients from 19 cohort studies published from 2010 to 2018 were included. A significant negative association was found between the GNRI and all-cause mortality in patients with chronic hemodialysis (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97, p=0.004) (per unit increase) and (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.88-2.46, p<0.00001) (low vs. high GNRI). Moreover, there was also a significant negative association between the GNRI (per unit increase) and cardiovascular events (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-1.00, p=0.01), as well as cardiovascular mortality (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.99, p=0.03). CONCLUSION Our findings supported the hypothesis that the low GNRI is associated with an increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in chronic hemodialysis patients. Based on our literature review, GNRI has been found to be an effective tool for identifying patients with nutrition-related risk of all-cause and cardiovascular disease.
4.
Determining Risk of Falls in Community Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Using Posttest Probability.
Lusardi, MM, Fritz, S, Middleton, A, Allison, L, Wingood, M, Phillips, E, Criss, M, Verma, S, Osborne, J, Chui, KK
Journal of geriatric physical therapy (2001). 2017;(1):1-36
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Falls and their consequences are significant concerns for older adults, caregivers, and health care providers. Identification of fall risk is crucial for appropriate referral to preventive interventions. Falls are multifactorial; no single measure is an accurate diagnostic tool. There is limited information on which history question, self-report measure, or performance-based measure, or combination of measures, best predicts future falls. PURPOSE First, to evaluate the predictive ability of history questions, self-report measures, and performance-based measures for assessing fall risk of community-dwelling older adults by calculating and comparing posttest probability (PoTP) values for individual test/measures. Second, to evaluate usefulness of cumulative PoTP for measures in combination. DATA SOURCES To be included, a study must have used fall status as an outcome or classification variable, have a sample size of at least 30 ambulatory community-living older adults (≥65 years), and track falls occurrence for a minimum of 6 months. Studies in acute or long-term care settings, as well as those including participants with significant cognitive or neuromuscular conditions related to increased fall risk, were excluded. Searches of Medline/PubMED and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) from January 1990 through September 2013 identified 2294 abstracts concerned with fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults. STUDY SELECTION Because the number of prospective studies of fall risk assessment was limited, retrospective studies that classified participants (faller/nonfallers) were also included. Ninety-five full-text articles met inclusion criteria; 59 contained necessary data for calculation of PoTP. The Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) was used to assess each study's methodological quality. DATA EXTRACTION Study design and QUADAS score determined the level of evidence. Data for calculation of sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), likelihood ratios (LR), and PoTP values were available for 21 of 46 measures used as search terms. An additional 73 history questions, self-report measures, and performance-based measures were used in included articles; PoTP values could be calculated for 35. DATA SYNTHESIS Evidence tables including PoTP values were constructed for 15 history questions, 15 self-report measures, and 26 performance-based measures. Recommendations for clinical practice were based on consensus. LIMITATIONS Variations in study quality, procedures, and statistical analyses challenged data extraction, interpretation, and synthesis. There was insufficient data for calculation of PoTP values for 63 of 119 tests. CONCLUSIONS No single test/measure demonstrated strong PoTP values. Five history questions, 2 self-report measures, and 5 performance-based measures may have clinical usefulness in assessing risk of falling on the basis of cumulative PoTP. Berg Balance Scale score (≤50 points), Timed Up and Go times (≥12 seconds), and 5 times sit-to-stand times (≥12) seconds are currently the most evidence-supported functional measures to determine individual risk of future falls. Shortfalls identified during review will direct researchers to address knowledge gaps.