| Literature DB >> 24065998 |
Ali Hashemi Kani1, Seyed Moayed Alavian, Ahmad Esmaillzadeh, Peyman Adibi, Leila Azadbakht.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dietary intake might have important role in non-alcoholic fatty liver diseases (NAFLD). Although, there are some reports on dietary intake and anthropometrics measurements, few studies have focused on the markers of assessing whole diet like dietary quality indices.Entities:
Keywords: Biochemical Processes; Diet Therapy; Healthy People Programs; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
Year: 2013 PMID: 24065998 PMCID: PMC3776150 DOI: 10.5812/hepatmon.10943
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hepat Mon ISSN: 1735-143X Impact factor: 0.660
Summary of Dietary Indices
| Description | |
|---|---|
|
| The method of Ledikwe et al. ( |
|
| This was calculated according to Kant et al. ( |
|
| The method which was introduced by Kennedy et al. ( |
|
| The ratio of daily individual intakes to standard recommended amounts for subject’s sex and age category was used for calculating nutrient adequacy ratio (NAR). The standard recommended amounts were based on the RDA (Recommended Dietary Allowances) and the DRI (Dietary Reference intake) ( |
Anthropometric and Biochemical Indices Among the Case (Non–Alcoholic Fatty Liver Patients) and Control Groups
| Variables | Groups, Mean ± SD | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case (n = 100) | Control (n = 100) | ||
|
| 38 | 42 | - |
|
| 37.9 ± 6.9 | 37.9 ± 6.9 | 0.09 |
|
| |||
|
| 55.9 ± 15.6 | 73.2 ± 12.9 | 0.04 |
|
| 27.9 ± 3.1 | 25.0 ± 2.0 | 0.03 |
|
| 109 ± 13.2 | 102 ± 12.5 | 0.05 |
|
| 96.1 ± 9.9 | 95.9 ± 9.1 | 0.04 |
|
| |||
|
| 129 ± 11.2 | 110 ± 10.1 | 0.08 |
|
| 89.7 ± 4.5 | 77.6 ± 3.9 | 0.03 |
|
| |||
|
| 6695.1 ± 2432.8 | 6593.2 ± 2311.1 | 0.19 |
|
| 15.2 ± 3.4 | 14.5 ± 1.8 | 0.28 |
|
| 98.2 ± 7.6 | 80.1 ± 6.7 | 0.07 |
|
| 218.2 ± 14.3 | 133.2 ± 12.2 | 0.01 |
|
| 129.9 ± 23.4 | 98.3 ± 13.0 | 0.01 |
|
| 48.4 ± 15.1 | 50.9 ± 17.3 | 0.41 |
|
| 222.5 ± 42.1 | 179.8 ± 40.0 | 0.05 |
|
| 53.0 ± 40.0 | 24.5 ± 12.4 | 0.01 |
|
| 74.9 ± 52.0 | 26.4 ± 13.0 | 0.01 |
|
| 204.8 ± 94.0 | 183.0 ± 87.1 | 0.04 |
|
| 4.8 ± 0.8 | 4.0 ± 0.5 | 0.05 |
|
| 24.4 ± 4.5 | 11.8 ± 5.0 | 0.01 |
|
| 6.7 ± 1.6 | 3.2 ± 1.0 | 0.01 |
|
| 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 0.23 |
aAbbreviations: ALP, Alkalinphosphatase; BUN, blood urea nitrogen
Dietary Intake Among the Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver Patient, and Control Groups
| Dietary intake | Groups, Mean ± SD | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case (n = 100) | Control (n = 100) | ||
|
| 2539 ± 2111 | 2193 ± 202 | 0.03 |
|
| 2391 ± 207 | 2071 ± 193 | 0.04 |
|
| |||
|
| 395 ± 38 | 327 ± 35 | 0.03 |
|
| 81 ± 16 | 67 ± 15 | 0.04 |
|
| 69 ± 17 | 65 ± 14 | 0.11 |
|
| 10.9 ± 4.6 | 16.1 ± 5.9 | 0.07 |
|
| 2.1 ± 1.9 | 3.1 ± 2.6 | 0.09 |
|
| 45.8 ± 21.0 | 59.3 ± 25.2 | 0.08 |
|
| 923.1 ± 511.1 | 1296.3 ± 523.3 | 0.06 |
|
| 232.5 ± 94.1 | 257.3 ± 96.3 | 0.09 |
|
| 8.4 ± 3.0 | 9.6 ± 4.6 | 0.06 |
|
| 2.3 ± 1.1 | 2.2 ± 1.2 | 0.71 |
|
| 10.1 ± 7.6 | 16.3 ± 9.6 | 0.05 |
|
| 1.59 ± 1.4 | 2.26 ± 1.7 | 0.02 |
|
| 571.3 ± 351.3 | 776.6 ± 361.2 | 0.05 |
|
| 2.1 ± 1.3 | 2.0 ± 1.2 | 0.053 |
|
| 9.4 ± 3.7 | 9.1 ± 3.3 | 0.73 |
|
| 31.3 ± 69.2 | 61.0 ± 101.3 | 0.001 |
|
| 378.1 ± 189.1 | 267.1 ± 181.2 | 0.001 |
|
| 297.3 ± 111.3 | 313.4 ± 197.3 | 0.19 |
|
| 293.7 ± 111.3 | 359.9 ± 251.1 | 0.01 |
|
| 10.3 ± 9.1 | 9.1 ± 8.7 | 0.10 |
|
| 84.9 ± 31.3 | 76.9 ± 30.1 | 0.11 |
|
| 43.1 ± 26.3 | 40.2 ± 24.4 | 0.16 |
|
| 331.1 ± 211.6 | 311.9 ± 203.6 | 0.23 |
Dietary Quality Indices Among the Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Patient, and Control Groups
| Dietary quality indices | Groups | P value[ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case (n = 100) | Control (n = 100) | ||
|
| 53.3 ± 17.1 | 63.9 ± 17.9 | 0.01 |
|
| 5.9 ± 2.3 | 7.7 ± 2.6 | 0.06 |
|
| 1.7 ± 0.5 | 1.1 ± 0.5 | 0.05 |
|
| 10.6 ± 4.1 | 14.1 ± 4.9 | 0.03 |
|
| |||
|
| 0.9 ± 0.2 | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 0.03 |
|
| 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.8 ± 0.3 | 0.81 |
|
| 0.9 ± 0.4 | 1.2 ± 0.4 | 0.03 |
|
| 1.6 ± 0.9 | 2.3 ± 1.1 | 0.03 |
|
| 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.03 |
|
| 1.6 ± 0.6 | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 0.02 |
|
| 1.1 ± 0.6 | 2.2 ± 1.0 | 0.01 |
|
| 1.2 ± 1.0 | 1.9 ± 1.1 | 0.04 |
|
| 0.9 ± 0.6 | 1.7 ± 0.7 | 0.03 |
|
| 1.2 ± 0.5 | 1.3 ± 0.6 | 0.54 |
a P values are resulted from student t-test
b Abbreviations: DDS, Dietary Diversity Score; DED, Dietary Energy Density; HEI, Healthy Eating Index; MAR, Mean Adequacy Ratio; NAR, Nutrient Adequacy Ratio
Odds Ratio for Having NAFLD in Different Quartiles of Dietary Quality Indices
| Quartiles of dietary quality indices | P trend | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
|
| 1.881(0.76-2.95) | 1.54 (0.64-2.67) | 1.31 (0.56-2.56) | 1[ | 0.07 |
|
| 1.76 (0.68-2.89) | 1.36 (0.59-2.33) | 1.30 (0.56-2.14) | 1[ | 0.09 |
|
| 0.53 (0.19-0.89) | 0.71 (0.31-1.14) | 0.77 (0.33-1.21) | 1[ | 0.05 |
|
| 2.03 (0.91-4.03) | 1.74 (0.57-3.86) | 1.36 (0.36-2.98) | 1[ | 0.05 |
aMultiple regression model was adjusted for age, sex, and BMI
Association Between Dietary Quality Indices (HEI), Anthropometric and Biochemical Indices
| Quartiles of HEI | P trend | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
|
| 2.181(0.86-3.25) | 1.74 (0.61-2.17) | 1.30 (0.46-2.36) | 1[ | 0.03 |
|
| 2.76 (0.78-4.89) | 2.26 (0.69-4.53) | 1.68 (0.51-2.84) | 1[ | 0.04 |
|
| 2.53 (0.89-4.19) | 1.71 (0.61-2.04) | 1.27 (0.43-1.81) | 1[ | 0.05 |
|
| 2.13 (0.91-4.01) | 1.71 (0.67-2.86) | 1.32 (0.56-2.28) | 1[ | 0.06 |
a Multiple regression model was adjusted for age, and sex. In other models except for overweight and obesity BMI was also adjusted