Introduction: Loss of skeletal muscle mass and function (sarcopenia) is common in individuals with obesity due to metabolic changes associated with a sedentary lifestyle, adipose tissue derangements, comorbidities (acute and chronic diseases) and during the ageing process. Co-existence of excess adiposity and low muscle mass/function is referred to as sarcopenic obesity (SO), a condition increasingly recognized for its clinical and functional features that negatively influence important patient-centred outcomes. Effective prevention and treatment strategies for SO are urgently needed, but efforts are hampered by the lack of a universally established SO definition and diagnostic criteria. Resulting inconsistencies in the literature also negatively affect the ability to define prevalence as well as clinical relevance of SO for negative health outcomes. Aims and Methods: The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and the European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) launched an initiative to reach expert consensus on a definition and diagnostic criteria for SO. The jointly appointed international expert panel proposes that SO is defined as the co-existence of excess adiposity and low muscle mass/function. The diagnosis of SO should be considered in at-risk individuals who screen positive for a co-occurring elevated body mass index or waist circumference, and markers of low skeletal muscle mass and function (risk factors, clinical symptoms, or validated questionnaires). Diagnostic procedures should initially include assessment of skeletal muscle function, followed by assessment of body composition where presence of excess adiposity and low skeletal muscle mass or related body compartments confirm the diagnosis of SO. Individuals with SO should be further stratified into stage I in the absence of clinical complications or stage II if cases are associated with complications linked to altered body composition or skeletal muscle dysfunction. Conclusions: ESPEN and EASO, as well as the expert international panel, advocate that the proposed SO definition and diagnostic criteria be implemented into routine clinical practice. The panel also encourages prospective studies in addition to secondary analysis of existing data sets, to study the predictive value, treatment efficacy and clinical impact of this SO definition.

Background: This initiative aims to build a global consensus around core diagnostic criteria for malnutrition in adults in clinical settings.Methods: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) was convened by several of the major global clinical nutrition societies. Empirical consensus was reached through a series of face‐to‐face meetings, telephone conferences, and e‐mail communications.Results: A 2‐step approach for the malnutrition diagnosis was selected, that is, first screening to identify at risk status by the use of any validated screening tool, and second, assessment for diagnosis and grading the severity of malnutrition. The malnutrition criteria for consideration were retrieved from existing approaches for screening and assessment. Potential criteria were subjected to a ballot among GLIM participants that selected 3 phenotypic criteria (non‐volitional weight loss, low body mass index, and reduced muscle mass) and 2 etiologic criteria (reduced food intake or assimilation, and inflammation or disease burden). To diagnose malnutrition at least 1 phenotypic criterion and 1 etiologic criterion should be present. Phenotypic metrics for grading severity are proposed. It is recommended that the etiologic criteria be used to guide intervention and anticipated outcomes. The recommended approach supports classification of malnutrition into four etiology‐related diagnosis categories.Conclusions: A consensus scheme for diagnosing malnutrition in adults in clinical settings on a global scale is proposed. Next steps are to secure endorsements from leading nutrition professional societies, to identify overlaps with syndromes like cachexia and sarcopenia, and to promote dissemination, validation studies, and feedback. The construct should be re‐considered every 3–5 years.

The first reports of accurate skeletal muscle mass measurement in human subjects appeared at about the same time as introduction of the sarcopenia concept in the late 1980s. Since then these methods, computed tomography and MRI, have been used to gain insights into older (i.e. anthropometry and urinary markers) and more recently developed and refined methods (ultrasound, bioimpedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) of quantifying regional and total body skeletal muscle mass. The objective of this review is to describe the evolution of these methods and their continued development in the context of sarcopenia evaluation and treatment. Advances in these technologies are described with a focus on additional quantifiable measures that relate to muscle composition and ‘quality’. The integration of these collective evaluations with strength and physical performance indices is highlighted with linkages to evaluation of sarcopenia and the spectrum of related disorders such as sarcopenic obesity, cachexia and frailty. Our findings show that currently available methods and those in development are capable of non-invasively extending measures from solely ‘mass’ to quality evaluations that promise to close the gaps now recognised between skeletal muscle mass and muscle function, morbidity and mortality. As the largest tissue compartment in most adults, skeletal muscle mass and aspects of muscle composition can now be evaluated by a wide array of technologies that provide important new research and clinical opportunities aligned with the growing interest in the spectrum of conditions associated with sarcopenia.