| Literature DB >> 27382573 |
Nengguang Fan1, Lijuan Zhang2, Zhenhua Xia2, Liang Peng3, Yufan Wang1, Yongde Peng1.
Abstract
Across-sectional study was performed in 541 type 2 diabetic patients to determine the relationship between serum uric acid (SUA) and NAFLD in type 2 diabetic patients. Clinical parameters including SUA were determined and NAFLD was diagnosed by ultrasonography. SUA was significantly higher in type 2 diabetic subjects with NAFLD than in those without NAFLD in men, but not in women. Furthermore, the prevalence rate of NAFLD increased progressively across the sex-specific SUA tertiles only in men (37.9%, 58.6%, and 72.6%, resp., P for trend < 0.001). After adjusting for confounding factors, the odd ratios (95% CI) for NAFLD were 1 (reference), 2.93 (95%CI 1.25-6.88), and 3.93 (95% CI 1.55-9.98), respectively, across the tertiles of SUA in men. Contrastingly, SUA levels in women were not independently associated with the risk of NAFLD. Our data suggests that SUA is specifically associated with NAFLD in male type 2 diabetic subjects, independent of insulin resistance and other metabolic factors.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27382573 PMCID: PMC4921134 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3805372
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Res Impact factor: 4.011
Clinical and biochemical characteristics of the study subjects.
| Characteristics | Women | Men | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-NAFLD | NAFLD |
| Non-NAFLD | NAFLD |
| |
|
| 117 | 153 | 118 | 153 | ||
| Age (years) | 61.7 ± 13.0 | 59.6 ± 10.2 | 0.163 | 57.7 ± 13.7 | 53.9 ± 15.1 | 0.032 |
| Duration (years) | 7 (3–11) | 3 (0–9) | <0.001 | 5 (0–10) | 2 (0–6) | 0.041 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.8 ± 3.4 | 26.1 ± 3.6 | <0.001 | 23.0 ± 2.9 | 26.1 ± 3.5 | <0.001 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 134.4 ± 18.5 | 136.6 ± 18.3 | 0.335 | 133.1 ± 18.8 | 134.1 ± 17.3 | 0.634 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 79.4 ± 10.0 | 82.8 ± 10.8 | 0.009 | 81.6 ± 9.9 | 83.1 ± 11.4 | 0.242 |
| FPG (mM) | 9.2 ± 4.2 | 11.0 ± 3.5 | <0.001 | 9.8 ± 3.5 | 11.1 ± 3.0 | 0.001 |
| HbA1C (%) | 10.4 ± 7.2 | 9.9 ± 2.3 | 0.49 | 10.3 ± 2.5 | 10.3 ± 2.1 | 0.99 |
| TG (mM) | 1.2 (0.9–1.6) | 1.7 (1.3–2.5) | <0.001 | 1.2 (0.9–1.6) | 1.8 (1.2–3.0) | <0.001 |
| TC (mM) | 4.8 ± 1.3 | 5.0 ± 1.2 | 0.204 | 4.6 ± 1.2 | 4.7 ± 1.4 | 0.4 |
| LDL-C (mM) | 3.1 ± 1.0 | 3.2 ± 1.1 | 0.171 | 3.0 ± 1.0 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 0.652 |
| HDL-C (mM) | 1.5 ± 0.5 | 1.2 ± 0.3 | <0.001 | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 1.1 ± 0.4 | <0.001 |
| ALT (IU/L) | 9 (7–11) | 13 (9–23) | <0.001 | 10 (8–14) | 14 (10–23) | <0.001 |
| AST (IU/L) | 17 (15–20) | 21 (16–29) | <0.001 | 17 (14–21) | 20 (16–28) | <0.001 |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) | 132 (112–160) | 142 (116–170) | 0.11 | 140 (112–161) | 137 (115–167) | 0.661 |
| HOMA-IR | 2.4 (1.5–4.1) | 4.5 (3.0–7.2) | <0.001 | 2.4 (1.6–3.8) | 3.9 (2.6–6.0) | <0.001 |
| SUA ( | 267.0 ± 88.2 | 275.7 ± 80.1 | 0.403 | 281.1 ± 80.3 | 334.1 ± 91.3 | <0.001 |
| Insulin therapy (%) | 24.1 | 15.6 | 0.238 | 9.8 | 12.9 | 0.604 |
| OADs therapy (%) | 48.3 | 25 | 0.008 | 33.3 | 34.3 | 0.913 |
Continuous variables were presented as means ± SD or median (interquartile range), and categorical variables were displayed as percentages (%). OADs, oral antidiabetic drugs.
Pearson's correlation and stepwise regression analysis of determinants of SUA.
| Women | Men | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Standardized |
|
|
| Standardized |
| |
| Age (years) | 0.083 | 0.159 | — | — | 0.013 | 0.826 | — | — |
| Duration | 0.035 | 0.55 | — | — | −0.017 | 0.779 | — | — |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.228 | <0.001 | 0.195 | 0.001 | 0.399 | <0.001 | 0.361 | <0.001 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 0.165 | 0.005 | — | — | 0.055 | 0.356 | — | — |
| DBP (mmHg) | 0.085 | 0.148 | — | — | 0.041 | 0.496 | — | — |
| TG (mM) | 0.117 | 0.049 | — | — | 0.115 | 0.056 | — | — |
| TC (mM) | 0.026 | 0.657 | — | — | 0.022 | 0.722 | — | — |
| LDL-C (mM) | −0.011 | 0.859 | — | — | −0.026 | 0.67 | — | — |
| HDL-C (mM) | −0.143 | 0.016 | — | — | −0.165 | 0.006 | — | — |
| FPG (mM) | −0.141 | 0.017 | — | — | −0.047 | 0.434 | — | — |
| HbA1C (%) | −0.117 | <0.054 | — | — | −0.185 | 0.003 | — | — |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) | −0.422 | <0.001 | −0.221 | 0.035 | −0.285 | <0.001 | −0.348 | <0.001 |
| HOMA-IR | 0.008 | 0.89 | — | — | −0.013 | 0.824 | — | — |
Figure 1Prevalence of NAFLD according to tertiles of SUA. T1, T2, and T3 represent tertile 1, tertile 2, and tertile 3 of SUA in total subjects (a), in men (b), and in women (c), respectively.
The risk of prevalent NAFLD according to tertiles of SUA.
| Women | Men | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 |
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 |
| |
| Model 1 | 1 | 1.28 (0.71–2.30) | 1.62 (0.89–2.95) | 1 | 2.32 (1.26–4.26) | 4.34 (2.27–8.28) | ||
|
| 0.421 | 0.117 | 0.117 | 0.007 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
|
| ||||||||
| Model 2 | 1 | 0.95 (0.49–1.85) | 0.94 (0.47–1.88) | 1 | 1.69 (0.90–3.57) | 2.12 (1.18–5.24) | ||
|
| 0.89 | 0.851 | 0.849 | 0.099 | 0.017 | 0.016 | ||
|
| ||||||||
| Model 3 | 1 | 0.99 (0.46–2.12) | 1.08 (0.45–2.62) | 1 | 2.93 (1.25–6.88) | 3.93 (1.55–9.98) | ||
|
| 0.975 | 0.864 | 0.871 | 0.014 | 0.004 | 0.003 | ||
Data are odds ratios (95% confidence interval) compared with tertile 1 group. Participants without NAFLD are defined as 0 and those with NAFLD are defined as 1.
Model 1 is unadjusted.
Model 2 is adjusted for age, duration of diabetes, SBP, DBP, and BMI.
Model 3 is further adjusted for insulin and OADs therapy, FPG, HbA1C, TG, TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, eGFR, and HOMA-IR.