Prevalence of primary non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease in a population‐based study and its association with biochemical and anthropometric measures

Abstract

NAFLD is prevalent in the general Israeli population and closely related to the metabolic syndrome. The use of ALT as a marker for NAFLD seriously underestimates its prevalence.

Association between serum uric acid and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in Korean adults

“…The prevalence of NAFLD in this study was 25.8% (32.2% in men and 17.4% in women), which was similar to the data from the general population in Italy (23%) (18), Israel (30%) (19) and Japan (29%) (20).…”

“…Third, central obesity indicated by waist circumference rather than BMI is more likely to be associated with metabolic syndrome and NAFLD (18). We used BMI instead of waist circumference as a component of metabolic syndrome and as a confounding variable in multivariate logistic regression model, not only because waist circumference was not measured at the beginning of this study, but also because BMI has already been shown to be associated with NAFLD in previous studies (19,20). Finally, although liver biopsy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of fatty liver, biopsy-proven NAFLD was not performed in the present study.…”

Impact of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease on Insulin Resistance in Relation to HbA1c Levels in Nondiabetic Subjects

“…In our study, the overall prevalence of NAFLD in nondiabetic Korean adults was 28.1 % (25.2 % aft er adjusting for sex), which is comparable to recent results of population-based ultrasonographic studies indicating that one out of every four adults has NAFLD ( 18,20,21,23 ). Recently, NAFLD was proposed to be closely associated with insulin resistance and is known to be expressed earlier than metabolic syndrome ( 7,8 ).…”

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and cardiovascular disease risk

“…In epidemiologic studies, ALT has been used as a marker for liver fat accumulation. Studies assessing the specificity and sensitivity of ALT as a marker of NAFLD are limited [13,14] and applying the laboratory defined cutoff value (ie, upper limit of the laboratory reference range) may underestimate the prevalence of NAFLD [14]. Prati et al [15] have suggested new cutoff values for ALT in order to facilitate the identification of subjects with NAFLD.…”