| Literature DB >> 24471572 |
Debbie A Lawlor1, Mark Callaway, Corrie Macdonald-Wallis, Emma Anderson, Abigail Fraser, Laura D Howe, Chris Day, Naveed Sattar.
Abstract
CONTEXT: The impact of adolescent nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) on health, independent of fat mass, is unclear.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24471572 PMCID: PMC3955251 DOI: 10.1210/jc.2013-3612
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab ISSN: 0021-972X Impact factor: 5.958
Figure 1.Participant flow from original birth cohort to the adolescent USS substudy used in this paper.
Associations With USS Fatty Liver (n = 1874)
| Risk Factor | Unit/Category | USS Fatty Liver, % | OR (95% CI) per Unit/Category | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | Per 6 months | N/A | 1.24 (0.92–1.68) | .2 |
| Sex | Female | 3.0 | Referent | .9 |
| Male | 2.9 | 0.96 (0.54–1.73) | ||
| Social class | Nonmanual | 2.6 | Referent | .1 |
| Manual | 5.0 | 1.91 (0.91–4.03) | ||
| Ethnicity | White | 2.9 | Referent | .6 |
| Nonwhite | 4.3 | 1.42 (0.39–5.11) | ||
| Fat mass, total | Per 1 SD[ | N/A | 3.15 (2.44–4.07) | <.001 |
| Fat mass, trunkal | Per 1 SD[ | N/A | 3.20 (2.47–4.15) | <.001 |
| BMI | Per 1 SD[ | N/A | 3.05 (2.36–3.93) | <.001 |
| Height | Per 1 SD[ | N/A | 0.96 (0.71–1.29) | .8 |
Abbreviation: N/A, not applicable.
Standardized for sex and age.
Adjusted for height and height squared.
Figure 2.Distribution of fat mass for those with and without USS liver fat.
Multivariable Associations of USS Fatty Liver With Cardiometabolic Risk Factors (n = 1874)
| Outcome | Mean Difference (95% CI) Comparing Those With With Those Without USS Fatty Liver, % | |
|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| Fasting triglycerides, % | 49.1 (29.0–72.5) | 23.6 (6.0–44.2) |
| Fasting HDLc, % | − 15.1 ( − 21.8 to − 7.8) | −8.1 (−16.0 to 0.6) |
| Fasting LDLc, % | 12.6 (1.9–24.4) | 1.5 (−9.1 to 13.4) |
| Fasting glucose, % | 7.4 (3.9–11.1) | 4.6 (1.0–8.3) |
| Fasting insulin, % | 111.0 (70.0–161.9) | 39.4 (10.7–75.5) |
All results are mean percentage differences, and the null value (of no difference between those with and without USS fatty liver) is 0. Model 1 was adjusted for age, sex, social class, and ethnicity. Model 2 was as model 1 but with additional adjustment for DXA fat mass, height, and height squared.
Figure 3.Multivariable associations of ultrasound scan liver fat with insulin resistance and liver fibrosis. The figure shows ORs (dots) and their CIs (vertical lines) for the association of USS fatty liver with liver fibrosis (the two results on the left) and insulin resistance (the two resuluts on the right), both without (model 1) and with (model 2) adjustment for fat mass. Model 1 was adjusted for age, sex, social class, and ethnicity. Model 2 was as model 1 but with additional adjustment for DXA fat mass, height, and height squared liver fibrosis defined as 1.39 m/s or greater shear velocity. Insulin resistance was defined as 90th percentile or greater of sex-specific fasting insulin (90th percentile: females, 86.44 pmol/L; males, 87.80 pmol/L).
Multivariable Associations of USS Fatty Liver With Markers of Liver Damage in Adolescents (n = 1874)
| Outcome | Mean Difference (95% CI) Comparing Those With USS Fatty Liver With Those Without USS Fatty Liver, % | |
|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| Shear velocity, %[ | 31.6 (23.9–39.7) | 22.8 (15.6–30.5) |
| Liver volume, % | 24.6 (15.6–34.2) | 9.3 (1.3–17.9) |
| ALT, % | 60.6 (36.5–88.9) | 30.9 (10.5–55.0) |
| AST, % | 19.8 (9.1–31.6) | 14.4 (3.6–26.3) |
| GGT, % | 54.4 (35.1–76.4) | 29.0 (11.9–48.6) |
| Haptoglobin, % | 48.1 (22.7–78.6) | 22.7 (0.8–49.4) |
All outcomes are mean percentage differences, and the null value (of no difference between those with and without USS fatty liver) is 0. Model 1 was adjusted for age, sex, social class, and ethnicity. Model 2 was as model 1 but with additional adjustment for DXA determined fat mass, height, and height squared.
Shear velocity is measured by ARFI.