Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commoncardiac arrhythmia with significant morbidity and mortalityin relation to thromboembolic stroke. Our study aimed toevaluate the safety and efficacy of dabigatran in strokeprevention in elderly patient with nonvalvular AF with regardto the risk of ischemic stroke and intracranial haemorrhage(ICH) in real-world setting.Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 200 patients ondabigatran and warfarin from January 2009 till September2016 was carried out. Data were collected for 100 patients ondabigatran and 100 patients on warfarin.Results: The mean follow-up period was 340.7±322.3 daysfor dabigatran group and 410.5±321.2 days for warfaringroup. The mean time in therapeutic range (TTR) was52±18.7%. The mean CHA2DS2 -VASc score for dabigatrangroup was 4.4±1.1 while 5.0±1.5 for warfarin group. None indabigatran group experienced ischemic stroke compared toone patient in warfarin group (p=0.316). There was onepatient in dabigatran group suffered from ICH compared tonone in warfarin group (p=0.316). Four patients in warfaringroup experienced minor bleeding, while none fromdabigatran group (p=0.043).Conclusion: Overall bleeding events were significantly lowerin dabigatran group compared to warfarin group. In thepresence of suboptimal TTR rates and inconveniences withwarfarin therapy, non-vitamin-K antagonist oralanticoagulants (NOAC) are the preferred agents for strokeprevention in elderly Asian patients for nonvalvula

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.