| Literature DB >> 29135945 |
Nicole Fakhoury-Sayegh1, Hassan Younes2, Gessica N H A Heraoui3, Raymond Sayegh4.
Abstract
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is considered the most common liver disease in the world. Dietary habits have a significant impact on the biological and physical profile of patients and increase the risk of NAFLD. The overall pattern of diet intake is more associated with health outcomes than nutrients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the nutritional profile and the dietary patterns of Lebanese NAFLD patients and compare it with controls. During this study; 112 NAFLD Lebanese adult patients (55 men and 57 women); and 110 controls (44 men and 66 women) were recruited. Dietary intake was evaluated by two 24-h recalls and a semi-quantitative 90-item food frequency questionnaire. Dietary patterns were determined by factor analysis. Results from the study demonstrated that 40% of cases belonged to the high fruit group as compared to 30% following a high meat; fast food dietary pattern. Both groups increased the odds of NAFLD by four-fold (p < 0.05). The traditional diet decreases the odds by 33% after adjustment with the covariables. The high fruit diet group was, as with the high meat, fast food dietary pattern, the main potential risk factor for NAFLD in Lebanese patients.Entities:
Keywords: fast food; high fruit group; high meat; non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29135945 PMCID: PMC5707717 DOI: 10.3390/nu9111245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Flowchart for selection and enrollment of study subjects (cases and controls). NAFLD: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; FFQ: Food Frequency Questionnaire.
Comparison of age and sociodemographic data between cases and controls.
| Cases ( | Controls ( | Total ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), mean ± SD | 39.9 ± 6.0 | 38.8 ± 13.2 | 0.39 | |
| Gender | ||||
| Men, | 55 (49.1) | 44 (40) | 0.17 | 99 (44.6) |
| Women, | 57 (50.9) | 66 (60) | 123 (55.4) | |
| Place of birth, | ||||
| Mount Lebanon | 17 (15.2) | 29 (26.4) | 0.09 | 46 (20.7) |
| North | 15 (13.4) | 10 (9.1) | 25 (11.3) | |
| South | 15 (13.4) | 14 (12.7) | 29 (13.1) | |
| Beirut | 42 (37.5) | 39 (35.5) | 81 (36.5) | |
| Bekaa | 16 (14.3) | 13 (11.8) | 29 (13.1) | |
| Nabatieh | 5 (4.5) | - | 5 (2.3) | |
| Abroad | 2 (1.7) | 5 (4.5) | 7 (3.2) | |
| Place of residence, | ||||
| Mount Lebanon | 37 (33.0) | 56 (50.9) | 0.0001 | 93 (41.9) |
| North | 12 (10.7) | 4 (3.6) | 16 (7.2) | |
| South | 7 (6.3) | 2 (1.8) | 9 (4.0) | |
| Beirut | 30 (26.8) | 38 (34.5) | 68 (30.6) | |
| Bekaa | 12 (10.7) | 7 (6.4) | 19 (8.5) | |
| Nabatieh | 10 (8.9) | - | 10 (4.5) | |
| Abroad | 4 (3.6) | 3 (2.7) | 7 (3.2) | |
| Marital Status, | ||||
| Unmarried | 18 (16.1) | 46 (41.8) | 0.0001 | 64 (28.8) |
| Married | 90 (80.4) | 62 (56.4) | 152 (68.5) | |
| Divorced | 3 (2.7) | 2 (1.8) | 5 (2.3) | |
| Widow/er | 1 (0.9) | - | 1 (0.5) | |
| Academic level, | ||||
| Illiterate | - | - | 0.001 | - |
| Elementary | 9 (8) | 1 (0.9) | 10 (4.5) | |
| Intermediate, secondary | 42 (37.5) | 14 (12. 8) | 56 (25.2) | |
| University | 61 (54.5) | 95 (86.3) | 156 (70.2) | |
| Occupation, | ||||
| Self-employed | 39 (34.8) | 33 (30.3) | 0.0001 | 72 (32.4) |
| Employee | 41 (36.6) | 53 (48.2) | 94 (42.3) | |
| Retired/unemployment | -/26 (23.2) | 7/3 (6.4/2.8) | 7/29 (3/13.1) | |
| Others | 6 (5.4) | 14 (12.7) | 20 (9.0) | |
| Crowding index †, | ||||
| ≤1 | 86 (76.8) | 76 (69.1) | 0.88 | 162 (73.0) |
| >1 | 31 (27.7) | 29 (26.4) | 60 (27.0) | |
Continuous variables are reported as geometric means ± standard deviations (SD); Statistical test used: independent t test; Categorical variables are reported as numbers and percentage; Statistical test used: χ2-test; † Crowding index: number of co-residents by room.
Comparison of clinical and environmental data between controls and cases.
| Cases ( | Controls ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Presence of metabolic syndrome, | 70 (62.5%) | 14 (12.7%) | 0.0001 |
| Hypertension ≥ 130/85 (mmHg), | 28 (25%)/29 (25.9%) | 7 (6.4%)/4 (3.6%) | 0.041/0.002 |
| Fasting blood sugar ≥ 5.5 mmol/L, | 95 (84.8%) | 85 (77.3%) | 0.072 |
| Triglycerides ≥ 1.7 mmol/L, | 55 (49.1%) | 8 (7.3%) | 0.0001 |
| HDL-C < 1 mmol/L (M), | 14 (12.5%) | 2 (1.8%) | 0.031 |
| <1.3 mmol/L (F), | 61 (54.5%) | 27 (24.5%) | 0.003 |
| Waist circumference (cm) (M) ≥ 94 § | 96 (85.7%) | 63 (57.3%) | 0.002 |
| (F) ≥ 80 § | 92 (82.2%) | 40 (36.4%) | 0.0001 |
| Waist/hip ratio (M) > 0.90 § | 106 (94.6%) | 91 (82.7%) | 0.06 |
| (F) > 0.85 § | 90 (80.4%) | 56 (50.9%) | 0.0001 |
| Obesity (yes), | 62 (55.3%) | 9 (8.2%) | 0.0001 |
| Diabetes type 2 (yes), | 21 (18.8%) | 1 (0.9%) | 0.0001 |
| HOMA-IR > 3, | 53 (47.3%) | 12 (10.9%) | 0.0001 |
| Cardiovascular disease (yes), | 1 (0.9%) | 0 (0%) | 0.321 |
| Family medical history (yes), | 97 (86.6%) | 78 (70.9%) | 0.004 |
| Smoking (yes), | 47 (41.9%) | 29 (26.4%) | 0.016 |
| Physical activity, (yes) | 21 (18.8%) | 56 (50.9%) | 0.0001 |
| Moderate, | 15 (13.4%) | 27 (24.5%) | 0.03 |
| Vigorous, | 6 (5.4%) | 29 (26.4%) | 0.008 |
Test χ2-test (categorical variables); § Reference values correspond to the criteria of IDF, 2009 for clinical diagnosis of the Metabolic Syndrome; Abbreviations: BMI, Body mass index; HDL-C, High density lipoprotein-Cholesterol; HOMA-IR, Homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; M, Male; F, Female.
Comparison of dietary data between controls and cases.
| Cases ( | Controls ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy intake, (kcal/day), mean ± SD (BMI < 30 kg/m2) | 3548.13 ± 0.20 | 2238.7 ± 0.17 | 0.0001 |
| Energy intake) (kcal/day), mean ± SD (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) | 3835.3 ± 0.16 | 3784.4 ± 0.22 | 0.935 |
| Energy intake, mean ± SD (Physical activity, no) | 3775.72 ± 0.19 | 2383.96 ± 0.22 | 0.0001 |
| Energy intake (kcal/day), mean ± SD (Physical activity, yes) | 3348.11 ± 0.15 | 2301.44 ± 0.15 | 0.0001 |
| % of energy from carbohydrate, mean ± SD | 45.7 ± 0.09 | 43.7 ± 0.08 | 0.124 |
| % of energy from protein, mean ± SD | 13.8 ± 0.14 | 14.5 ± 0.11 | 0.446 |
| % of energy from fat, mean ± SD | 37.2 ± 0.10 | 38.9 ± 0.07 | 0.099 |
| Simple carbohydrate (g/day), mean ± SD | 131.8 ± 0.24 | 89.12 ± 0.23 | 0.0001 |
| Fructose (g/day), mean ± SD | 57.5 ± 0.29 | 38.0 ± 0.22 | 0.0001 |
| Fructose (g/day) coming from fruits, mean ± SD | 22.4 ± 0.34 | 15.1 ± 0.33 | 0.0001 |
Continuous variables are reported as geometric means ± standard deviations. Statistical test used: independent t-test; SD, standard deviation. Energy intake/day had been adjusted for BMI (≥30 kg/m2) and for physical activity (no/yes) Energy intake/day, % of energy from carbohydrate, % of energy from proteins and from fat, simple carbohydrate (g/day), fructose, and fructose present in fruits (g/day) had been analyzed using the United States department of agriculture (USDA) [27], (Nutrilog, Marans, France, version 2.33).
Factor loading matrix for the three identified dietary patterns in the study population.
| Food Group | Patterns | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional Lebanese | High Fruits | High Meat, Fast Food | |
| Vegetables | 0.69 | ||
| Chickpeas, red beans, lentils, peas | 0.44 | ||
| Fruits and fruit juices | 0.71 | ||
| Vegetable oil/olives | 0.28 | 0.29 | |
| Fish and sea food | 0.35 | ||
| Almonds, walnuts, hazelnuts, sesames | 0.20 | ||
| Desserts, Arabic pastries | 0.23 | ||
| Beef meat | 0.59 | ||
| Hamburger | 0.58 | ||
| Fries | 0.56 | ||
| Pork | 0.56 | ||
| Pizza | 0.53 | ||
| Spaghetti or noodles or cooked rice | 0.48 | ||
| Chicken | 0.49 | ||
| Carbonated beverages | 0.46 | ||
| Pies or fatayer | 0.45 | ||
| 1 chicken egg | 0.44 | ||
| Fresh cream | 0.42 | ||
| Mayonnaise or mustard | 0.41 | ||
| Ketchup | 0.41 | ||
| Chips | 0.36 | ||
| Hot dog | 0.35 | ||
| Energy drink | 0.28 | ||
| Ham | 0.28 | ||
| Milk chocolate | 0.21 | ||
| Percent variance explained by each pattern | 15.53% | 9.74% | 7.43% |
Extraction method: principal component analysis; Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization; Absolute values <0.2 were excluded from the table.
Figure 2Distribution of participants according to the different dietary patterns.
Figure 3Distribution of participants according to the different dietary patterns, BMI, and gender.
Spearman’s correlation coefficient between pattern scores and anthropometric measurements, nutrients, and total energy intake.
| Traditional Lebanese | High Fruit | High Meat Fast food | |
|---|---|---|---|
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.188 * | 0.148 | 0.183 * |
| Energy intake/day (kcal) | 0.122 | 0.284 ** | 0.468 ** |
| Carbohydrates (g) | 0.180 * | 0.154 | 0.377 ** |
| Protein (g) | 0.214 ** | 0.233 ** | 0.391 ** |
| Fat (g) | 0.156 | 0.162 * | 0.437 ** |
| Saturated fatty acids (%) | 0.113 | 0.032 | 0.363 ** |
| Cholesterol (g) | 0.039 | −0.037 | 0.337 ** |
| Polyunsaturated fatty acid (%) | −0.181 * | −0.023 | 0.111 |
| Sucrose (g) | 0.153 | 0.252 ** | 0.234 ** |
| Fructose (g) | 0.149 | 0.307 ** | 0.240 ** |
| Dietary fiber (g) | 0.222 ** | 0.235 ** | 0.039 |
| Omega-3 (g) | 0.195 * | 0.211 ** | 0.133 |
| Omega-6 (g) | 0.182 * | 0.081 | 0.177 * |
Adjustment for energy was done by residual method described by Willet [33]. * Correlation is significant at p < 0.05; ** Correlation is significant at p < 0.01. The association between the dietary patterns and the odds of NAFLD was highlighted in Table 6. Both high meat, fast food and high fruit dietary pattern groups were associated with a four-fold increase in the odds of NAFLD (OR: 4.081, CI: 1.356–12.28) (OR: 4.061, CI: 1.320–12.10), respectively, after adjustment with co-variables (Model 2), while scores of the traditional pattern were associated with low odds of NAFLD (OR: 0.303, CI: 0.107–0.859).
Dietary patterns of cases and controls.
| ( | Cases ( | Controls ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red or organ meat consumed, ≥5–6 servings/week or more | (M): 20 (43.5%) | (M): 9 (69.2%) | (M): 0.101 |
| (F): 29 (63.5%) | (F): 9 (28.1%) | (F): 0.002 * | |
| Raw or cooked vegetables, less than 2 servings/day | (M): 35 (74.5) | (M): 4 (30.8) | (M): 0.003 * |
| (F): 30 (65.2%) | (F): 15 (46.9%) | (F): 0.107 | |
| Fruits consumed, 3–5 servings/day or more | (M): 24 (51.5%) | (M):10 (71.4%) | (M): 0.178 |
| (F): 20 (43.5%) | (F): 7 (21.9%) | (F): 0.041 * | |
| Carbonated beverages or prepackaged juices consumed, ≥1 serving/day | (M): 8 (17.4%) | (M): 0 (0%) | (M): 0.094 |
| (F): 9 (19.6%) | (F): 4 (12.5%) | (F): 0.410 | |
| Honey, molasses or jam consumed, ≥1 serving/day or more | (M): 15 (33.3%) | (M): 3 (42.9%) | (M): 0.622 |
| (F): 7 (15.2%) | (F): 5 (22.7%) | (F): 0.447 | |
| Fish or seafood consumed, ≥1 servings/week | (M): 3 (6.4%) | (M): 0 (0%) | (M): 0.332 |
| (F): 9 (19.6%) | (F): 4 (12.5%) | (F): 0.410 | |
| Fat and oils used: vegetable oils (only) † | 59 (52.7%) | 78 (70.9%) | 0.009 * |
| Olive oils used in dressing and cooking (from total vegetable oil used) | 38 (33.9%) | 68 (61.8%) | 0.002 * |
| Kind of meat consumed | |||
| Beef | 111 (99.1%) | 106 (96.4%) | 0.56 |
| Lamb | 53 (47.3%) | 46 (41.8%) | 0.97 |
| Beef, chicken and lamb interchangeably | 112 (100%) | 107 (97.3%) | 0.51 |
Results in the table are related to the percent of cases and controls consuming >3000 kcal/day for men and >2000 kcal/day for women according to the high/low consumption of different food/day/week. Statistical test used: χ2-test. * Statistical significance, p < 0.05. † Vegetable oil, such as corn or sunflower oil, are mainly used for cooking, while olive oil is mainly used for dressing. One serving of meat = 120 g; one serving of fish/seafood = 90 g; 1serving of raw vegetables = 1 cup or ½ cup for cooked vegetables; one serving of fruits = 1 fruit or ½ cup of fruit juice; one serving of honey or jam = 1 tablespoon; one serving of dairy products = 1 cup of milk or 40 g of cheese. Abbreviations: NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; F, female; M, male. The cut-off ≥5–6 servings of red meat/week or more was determined according to the study done by Mirmirian et al. on meat consumption between NAFLD participants and controls [34]. The cut-off for raw or cooked vegetables/day, fruits, dairy products, fish or seafood, and honey or molasses was determined according to the Mediterranean Diet Foundation, 2011 [35]. The cut-off for carbonated beverages consumed/day was determined according to the study done by Maersk et al. [36].
Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between dietary patterns and the odds of NAFLD in the study population.
| Traditional Lebanese | High Fruit Group | High Meat, Fast Food Group | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | CI | OR | CI | OR | CI | |
| 0.349 | 0.135–0.906 | 3.092 | 1.151–8.049 | 3.192 | 1.251–8.149 | |
| 0.303 | 0.107–0.859 | 4.061 | 1.320–12.10 | 4.081 | 1.356–12.28 | |
* Model 1 is adjusted for presence of metabolic syndrome (yes/no), energy intake (Kcal/day) and education (illiterate, primary, high school, and university); ** Model 2 is adjusted for variables in Model 1, as well as physical activity (no/yes), family history (yes/no), smoking (yes, no), place of residence and profession (freelance, employee, unemployed, retirement, and others). OR, Odds Ratio; CI, Confidence Interval.