Key result
Higher fat-free mass index is linked to ~0.04-mm greater cIMT per SD, despite handgrip benefits.
Why the study?
Are fat-free mass index and handgrip strength independently associated with mean carotid intima-media thickness in community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older?
Cross-Sectional (n=352)
Single examiner blinded to clinical and body-composition data
No
Are fat-free mass index and handgrip strength independently associated with mean carotid intima-media thickness in community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older?
In older community-dwelling Korean adults, muscle mass (FFMI) and muscle strength (handgrip strength) exhibited opposing independent associations with carotid intima-media thickness, suggesting muscle quantity and functional strength reflect distinct dimensions of vascular aging.
These cross-sectional associations should not inform vascular risk assessment; leaves open whether muscle mass and strength reflect distinct vascular aging pathways.
Background The independent associations of muscle mass and muscle strength with carotid intima-media thickness remain unclear. This study examined the cross-sectional associations of fat-free mass index (FFMI) and handgrip strength with mean carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) among community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older in Chuncheon, Korea. We also examined the association between mean cIMT and dynapenia. Methods This cross-sectional analysis used data from the 2007 assessment of the Hallym Aging Study. Among 702 participants who attended the assessment, 611 were aged 60 years or older, and 352 community-dwelling Korean adults with available cIMT, FFMI, atherogenic index of plasma (AIP), and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (ba-PWV) measurements were included. FFMI was calculated from bioelectrical impedance analysis-derived fat-free mass divided by height squared. Handgrip strength was measured using a digital dynamometer, and dynapenia was defined using Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 sex-specific cutoffs. Mean cIMT was the primary outcome, and was measured using high-resolution B-mode carotid ultrasonography. Standardized FFMI and handgrip strength were the primary exposures. Their independent associations with mean cIMT were evaluated using multivariable linear regression with both muscle-related measures entered simultaneously. AIP and ba-PWV were included as adjustment variables in an extended model. The association between mean cIMT and dynapenia was evaluated as a secondary analysis using multivariable logistic regression, with dynapenia as the dependent variable. Results The median age of the 352 participants was 72.0 years, and 49.1% were men. In the primary multivariable model including both standardized FFMI and handgrip strength, each 1-SD increase in FFMI was associated with a 0.035-mm higher mean cIMT (95% CI, 0.014 to 0.056), whereas each 1-SD increase in handgrip strength was associated with a 0.034-mm lower mean cIMT (95% CI, − 0.064 to − 0.004). In the secondary analysis, higher mean cIMT was associated with greater odds of dynapenia (OR = 1.23 per 0.1-mm increase; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.43). Conclusions Among community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older, higher FFMI and greater handgrip strength were associated with higher and lower mean cIMT, respectively, after multivariable adjustment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Community-dwelling older adults assessed for subclinical carotid atherosclerosis and muscle health (n=352). Standardized fat-free mass index (FFMI) and handgrip strength (per 1-SD increase) was evaluated on Mean carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT, mm) measured by high-resolution B-mode ultrasonography (MD 0.035 mm per 1-SD FFMI; MD -0.034 mm per 1-SD handgrip strength, 95% CI 0.014 to 0.056, p=<0.01). Each 1-SD increase in fat-free mass index was associated with a 0.035-mm higher mean cIMT (95% CI 0.014-0.056), whereas 1-SD higher handgrip strength was associated with a 0.034-mm lower mean cIMT.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: