Prevalence, distribution, and hepatic fibrosis burden of the different subtypes of steatotic liver disease in primary care settings - PubMed (original) (raw)

. 2024 Jun 1;79(6):1393-1400.

doi: 10.1097/HEP.0000000000000664. Epub 2023 Nov 1.

Affiliations

Prevalence, distribution, and hepatic fibrosis burden of the different subtypes of steatotic liver disease in primary care settings

Chul-Min Lee et al. Hepatology. 2024.

Abstract

Background and aim: In relation to the new umbrella terminology for steatotic liver disease (SLD), we aimed to elucidate the prevalence, distribution, and clinical characteristics of the SLD subgroups in the primary care setting.

Approach and results: We retrospectively collected data from 2535 individuals who underwent magnetic resonance elastography and MRI proton density fat fraction during health checkups in 5 primary care health promotion clinics. We evaluated the presence of cardiometabolic risk factors according to predefined criteria and divided all the participants according to the new SLD classification. The prevalence of SLD was 39.13% in the total cohort, and 95.77% of the SLD cases had metabolic dysfunction (one or more cardiometabolic risk factors). The prevalence of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) was 29.51%, with those of metabolic dysfunction and alcohol associated steatotic liver disease (MetALD) and alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) at 7.89% and 0.39%, respectively. According to the old criteria, the prevalence of NAFLD was 29.11%, and 95.80% of the NAFLD cases fulfilled the new criteria for MASLD. The distribution of SLD subtypes was highest for MASLD, at 75.40%, followed by MetALD at 20.06%, cryptogenic SLD at 3.33%, and ALD at 1.01%. The MetALD group had a significantly higher mean magnetic resonance elastography than the MASLD or ALD group.

Conclusion: Almost all the patients with NAFLD met the new criteria for MASLD. The fibrosis burden of the MetALD group was higher than those of the MASLD and ALD groups.

Copyright © 2023 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Rinella ME, Lazarus JV, Ratziu V, Francque SM, Sanyal AJ, Kanwal F, et al. A multi-society Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature. Hepatology. 2023. [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Ratziu V, Rinella M, Beuers U, Loomba R, Anstee QM, Harrison S, et al. The times they are a-changin’ (for NAFLD as well). J Hepatol. 2020;73:1307–1309.
    1. Younossi ZM, Rinella ME, Sanyal AJ, Harrison SA, Brunt EM, Goodman Z, et al. From NAFLD to MAFLD: Implications of a premature change in terminology. Hepatology. 2021;73:1194–1198.
    1. Caussy C, Alquiraish MH, Nguyen P, Hernandez C, Cepin S, Fortney LE, et al. Optimal threshold of controlled attenuation parameter with MRI-PDFF as the gold standard for the detection of hepatic steatosis. Hepatology. 2018;67:1348–1359.
    1. Idilman IS, Aniktar H, Idilman R, Kabacam G, Savas B, Elhan A, et al. Hepatic steatosis: Quantification by proton density fat fraction with MR imaging versus liver biopsy. Radiology. 2013;267:767–775.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources