Comparison of the Suitability Between NRS2002 and MUST as the First-Step Screening Tool for GLIM Criteria in Hospitalized Patients With GIST

Comparison of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition and the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment for diagnosing malnutrition in patients undergoing surgery for hepatobiliary and pancreatic malignancies

Introduction

Objective: to analyse the differences in malnutrition assessment between the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) among patients with hepatobiliary and pancreatic malignancies. Method: this study was a cross-sectional study and included 126 hospitalised patients who underwent surgery for hepatobiliary and pancreatic malignancies between November 1, 2019 and August 1, 2020. The patients' clinical data were collected, and malnutrition assessments were completed using the different nutritional assessment tools. The consistency of both tools was analysed using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Results: the prevalence of malnutrition showed a difference in diagnosis results between the GLIM criteria (36.51 %) and the PG-SGA (55.56 %). The two methods had moderate consistency (kappa = 0.590, p < 0.01). The sensitivity of a malnutrition diagnosis using a combination of GLIM and PG-SGA was 65.7 % (53.3 % and 76.4 %, respectively), and specificity was 100 % (92 % and 100 %, respectively). When malnutrition was evaluated using only PG-SGA, sensitivity was 88.9 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 63.9 % to 98.1 %), whereas when only the GLIM score was used for malnutrition evaluation, sensitivity was 98.2 % (95 % CI, 92.8 % to 99.7 %). In addition, the PG-SGA score and the GLIM score had significant correlations. Conclusion: GLIM performed better than PG-SGA in the correlation analysis of nutritional indicators. GLIM is more suitable for patients with hepatobiliary and pancreatic malignancies than PG-SGA.

Screening and assessment of malnutrition in patients with liver cirrhosis

The development and advancement of malnutrition is associated not only with the progression of hepatic dysfunction, but also with cirrhosis-related complications. However, the prevalence of malnutrition reported in different studies varies widely due to differences in diagnostic methods and patient investigation settings. Therefore, we need to identify malnourished patients promptly and accurately. The purpose of this review was to compare the validity and reliability of nutritional screening tools and to select the most appropriate nutritional risk screening for patients with cirrhosis. We compared nutritional risk screening tools such as the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Royal Free Hospital-Nutritional Prioritizing Tool (RFH-NPT) and Liver Disease Undernutrition Screening Tool (LDUST). Royal Free Hospital-Nutritional Prioritizing Tool (RFH-NPT) is more feasible to screen cirrhotic patients for nutritional risk, and is highly reproducible, considering the impact of sodium and water retention; so it is practical to screen cirrhotic patients via RFH-NPT for nutritional risk, subsequently, to evaluate the nutritional status of patients with nutritional risk via the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) diagnostic criteria. L3-SMI (third lumbar-skeletal muscle index) can accurately define sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients and also be used for clinical nutritional status assessment.

Prognostic potential of nutritional risk screening and assessment tools in predicting survival of patients with pancreatic neoplasms: a systematic review

BACKGROUNDS & AIMS

The nutritional evaluation of pancreatic cancer (PC) patients lacks a gold standard or scientific consensus, we aimed to summarize and systematically evaluate the prognostic value of nutritional screening and assessment tools used for PC patients.

METHODS

Relevant studies were retrieved from major databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) and searched from January 2010 to December 2023. We performed meta-analyses with STATA 14.0 when three or more studies used the same tool.

RESULTS

This analysis included 27 articles involving 6,060 PC patients. According to a meta-analysis of these studies, poor nutritional status evaluated using five nutritional screening tools Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), Controlling Nutritional Status Score (CONUT), Nutrition Risk Screening (NRS2002) and Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) was associated with all-cause mortality in PC patients. But Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) did not. Of all tools analyzed, CONUT had the maximum HR for mortality (HR = 1.978, 95%CI 1.345-2.907, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

All-cause mortality in PC patients was predicted by poor nutritional status. CONUT may be the best nutritional assessment tool for PC patients. The clinical application value of Short Form Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA-SF), Generated Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and Patient-generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) in PC patients need to be confirmed. In order to improve patients' nutritional status and promote their recovery, nutritional screening tools can be used.

REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (number CRD42022376715).

Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The proposal of the global leadership initiative in malnutrition (GLIM) criteria has received great attention from clinicians. The criteria are mainly used in the research environment and have the potential to be widely used in the clinic in the future. However, the prevalence of malnutrition and risk of future malnutrition based on a current diagnosis of malnutrition are worth exploring.

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed from the earliest available date to 1 February 2023. According to the diagnostic criteria of the GLIM, we analysed the prevalence of malnutrition by directly adopting the GLIM criteria for diagnosis without a previous nutritional risk screening (one-step approach) and by adopting the GLIM criteria for diagnosis after a nutritional risk screening (two-step approach). The main outcome was the prevalence of malnutrition based on the one-and two-step approaches. Secondary outcomes were the future risk of malnutrition based on the GLIM diagnosis, including mortality within and beyond 1 year. primary outcomes were pooled using random-effects models, and secondary outcomes are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

A total of 64 articles were included in the study, including a total of 47,654 adult hospitalized patients and 15,089 malnourished patients based on the GLIM criteria. Malnutrition was diagnosed by the one-step approach in 18 studies and by the two-step approach in 46 studies. The prevalence of malnutrition diagnosed by the one-and two-step approaches was 53% (95% CI, 42%-64%) and 39% (95% CI, 0.35%-0.43%), respectively. The prevalence of malnutrition diagnosed by the GLIM criteria after a nutritional risk screening was quite different; the prevalence of malnutrition diagnosed by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) GLIM tool was 35% (95% CI, 29%-40%); however, the prevalence of malnutrition diagnosed by the Mini Nutrition Assessment (MNA) GLIM tool was 48% (95% CI, 35%-62%). Among the disease types, the prevalence of malnutrition in cancer patients was 44% (95% CI, 36%-52%), while that in acute and critically ill patients was 44% (95% CI, 33%-56%). The prevalence in patients in internal medicine wards was 40% (95% CI, 34%-45%), while that in patients in surgical wards was 47% (95% CI, 30%-64%). In addition, the mortality risk within 1 year (HR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.95-3.52; I² = 77.1%) and beyond 1 year (HR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.70-2.45; I² = 59.9%) of patients diagnosed with malnutrition by the GLIM criteria was double that of patients with normal nutrition.

Conclusion

The prevalence of malnutrition diagnosed by the GLIM criteria after a nutritional risk screening was significantly lower than the prevalence of malnutrition diagnosed directly by the GLIM criteria. In addition, the mortality risk was significantly greater among malnourished patients assessed by the GLIM criteria.Systematic review registration: identifier CRD42023398454.

The Relationship between Nutritional Risk and the Most Common Chronic Diseases in Hospitalized Geriatric Population from Central Poland

The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) and the prevalence of concomitant chronic diseases among hospitalized older adults. This study included 2122 consecutively hospitalized older participants with an average age of 82 years. The criteria to participate were the ability to communicate and give consent. In multivariate design, the prevalence of nutritional risk with at least 3 points in the NRS-2002 score was associated with the presence of stroke, atrial fibrillation, dementia and pressure ulcers. Patients with arterial hypertension, lipid disorders, osteoarthritis and urine incontinence had a significantly lower (better) NRS-2002 score. The explanation of the inverse relationship between some disorders and nutritional risk may be their occurrence in relatively earlier age and the relationship with body mass index. In conclusion, the study revealed which medical conditions coexist with the increased nutritional risk in a “real-world” hospitalized geriatric population. The hospital admission of an older subject with stroke, atrial fibrillation, dementia or pressure ulcers should primarily draw attention to the nutritional risk of the patient.

The emerging roles of next-generation metabolomics in critical care nutrition

Critical illness leads to millions of deaths worldwide each year, with a significant surge due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with critical illness are frequently associated with systemic metabolic disorders and malnutrition. The idea of intervention for critically ill patients through enteral and parenteral nutrition has been paid more and more attention gradually. However, current nutritional therapies focus on evidence-based practice, and there have been lacking holistic approaches for nutritional support assessment. Metabolomics is a well-established omics technique in system biology that enables comprehensive profiling of metabolites in a biological system and thus provides the underlying information expressed and modulated by all other omics layers. In recent years, with the development of high-resolution and accurate mass spectrometry, metabolomics entered a new "generation", promoting its broader applications in critical care nutrition. In this review, we first described the technological development and milestones of next-generation metabolomics in the past 20 years. We then discussed the emerging roles of next-generation metabolomics in advancing our understanding of critical care nutrition, such as nutritional deficiency risk evaluation, metabolic mechanisms of nutritional therapies, and novel nutrition target identification.