Shift in prevalence and systemic inflammation levels from NAFLD to MAFLD: a population-based cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background Variations in the prevalence and systemic inflammatory (SI) status between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and newly defined metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have only been reported by few studies. Hence, this study aimed to compile data on the prevalence and the systemic inflammation levels of MAFLD and NAFLD in a general population from Southeast China was summarized to explore the potential effect of the transformation of disease definition. Methods A total of 6718 general population participants aged 35–75 were enrolled. Logistic regression and restricted cubic spline (RCS) models were used to examine the relationship between 15 SI indicators and NAFLD and MAFLD. The predicted values of MAFLD and NAFLD were analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results The prevalence of MAFLD and NAFLD was 34.7% and 32.4%, respectively. Their overlapping rate was 89.7%, while only 8.3% and 1.9% of participants were MAFLD-only and NAFLD-only. Among three FLD groups, the MAFLD-only group had the highest levels of 8 SI indicators, including CRP, WBC, LYMPH, NEUT, MONO, ALB, NLR, and SIRI. The non-FLD group had the lower levels of all 15 SI indicators compared with all FLD subgroups. The odds ratios (ORs) of 10 SI indicators were significant in both multivariable-adjusted logistic regression and RCS analyses of MAFLD or NAFLD, including CRP, WBC, LYMPH, NEUT, MONO, ALB, PLR, LMR, ALI and CA. ROC analysis showed that the AUC values of all SI were lower than 0.7 in both MAFLD and NAFLD. Conclusions MAFLD could cover more FLD than NAFLD, and the MAFLD-only group had a more severe inflammation status, whereas the NAFLD-only exhibited lower levels. Moreover, there was not a high AUC and a high sensitivity of SI indicators, suggesting that SI indicators are not good indicators to diagnose NAFLD/MAFLD.

Associations between Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers and Metabolic Dysfunction Associated Steatotic Liver Disease: Findings from NHANES

“…However, LMR and NLR did not exhibit signi cant correlations with MASLD, possibly due to variations in participant selection. In metabolic dysfunctionassociated fatty liver disease (MAFLD), ALI, SIRI, and CAR are known to increase signi cantly [11]. Our Several limitations should be considered in the interpretation of our results.…”

“…In ammation represents the body's innate response to tissue injury or infection 10 , resulting in the release of numerous in ammatory mediators. If in ammation persists, it can progress into chronic systemic in ammatory changes 11 , exacerbating tissue damage. It's widely acknowledged that systemic in ammation serves as a pivotal pathophysiological mechanism and focal point for the therapy of liver steatosis 12 .…”

Associations of life’s essential 8 with MAFLD and liver fibrosis among US adults: a nationwide cross-section study

“…Inflammation also has a significant impact on CVD and MAFLD. According to reports, MAFLD could cover more FLD than NAFLD, and the MAFLD-only group had a more severe inflammation status ( 44 ). The association between obesity and MAFLD, typically characterized by low-grade inflammation, represents a chronic metabolic disorder.…”

The association between serum magnesium and chronic kidney disease in Chinese adults: a cross-sectional study

“…Information on age, sex, residential place, education level, self-reported diagnosed fracture/diabetes/hypertension, and lifestyles (e.g., smoking, and drinking) were obtained from a face-to-face interview. We divide the subject’s educational level into 4 categories (no formal education, primary school, middle school, high school or higher) [ 26 , 27 ]. Individual diet was repeatedly evaluated by a household food inventory survey, and 24-h dietary recalls on three consecutive days were performed to assess individual diets [ 28 ].…”