| Literature DB >> 30094399 |
Devika Kapuria1, Varun K Takyar1, Ohad Etzion1, Pallavi Surana1, James H O'Keefe2, Christopher Koh1.
Abstract
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is becoming common in the United States and throughout the world and can progress to cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. There is a strong association between coronary artery disease and NAFLD due to common risk factors, such as metabolic syndrome, obesity, and diabetes mellitus. Subclinical atherosclerosis, defined as coronary artery calcification in asymptomatic patients, has been shown to have a higher incidence in patients with NAFLD. We performed a meta-analysis to examine the association of NAFLD with subclinical atherosclerosis measured by coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring. Data were extracted from 12 studies selected using a predefined search strategy. NAFLD was diagnosed by abdominal ultrasound or computed tomography scans. The rate of coronary artery calcification was analyzed using random effects models, and publication bias was assessed using Egger's regression test. A total of 42,410 subjects were assessed, including 16,883 patients with NAFLD. Mean CAC score was significantly higher in subjects with NAFLD compared to those without NAFLD (odds ratio with random effects model, 1.64; 95% confidence inteval, 1.42-1.89). This association remained significant through subgroup analyses for studies with >1,000 subjects and a higher CAC score cutoff of >100. Higher aspartate aminotransferase levels were also associated with increased subclinical atherosclerosis (mean difference 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-2.34).Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30094399 PMCID: PMC6078218 DOI: 10.1002/hep4.1199
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hepatol Commun ISSN: 2471-254X
Figure 1Study flowsheet. Abbreviation: OR, odds ratio; HR, hazard ratio.
Details of Studies Included in the Meta‐Analysis
| Design | Number of Subjects | Age | Sex (% Males) | NAFLD Determination | CAC Definition | Plaques (Calcified) | Risk Factors Adjustment | Study Quality | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen et al. | Cross‐sectional | 295 | 52.6 ± 11 | 65% | CT (L:S ratio) | CAC >100 | smoking, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia | **********‡ | |
| Chhabra et al. | Cross‐sectional | 377 | 62.3 ± 8.5 vs 55.9 ± 9.5† | 51.90% | CT (L:S ratio) | CAC >100 | age, sex, smoking, dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes | ********* | |
| Juarez‐Rojas et al. | Cross‐sectional | 765 | 55 ± 9 vs 54.3 ± 10 | 47% | CT (L:S ratio) | CAC >0 | age, smoking, BMI, total cholesterol, CRP | ********* | |
| Al Rifai et al. | Cross‐sectional | 3,976 | 61.2 ± 9.6 vs 63.3 ± 10.5 | 45.10% | CT (L:S ratio) | CAC >0 | age, gender, ethnicity, smoking, LDL, statin, education | ********** | |
| Jung et al. | Cross‐sectional | 1,218 | 52.5 ± 8 vs 51 ± 10 | 49.50% | US | CAC >100 | age, gender, BMI, waist to hip ratio, uric acid, BP, TGs, HDL, DM, statin | ******* | |
| Kang et al. | Cross‐sectional | 772 | 55 ± 9 vs 45.8 ± 8.4† | 68% | US | CAC >100 | 59% | age, smoking, HTN, DM2, LDL, HDL, metabolic syndrome | ********* |
| Kim et al. | Cross‐sectional | 4,023 | 57.5 ± 9 vs 56.4 ± 9.6 | 60.70% | US | CAC >0 | age, sex, BMI, waist circumference, alcohol, smoking, cholesterol, HTN, DM2, HDL, CRP, TGs | ********** | |
| Kim et al. | Cross‐sectional study | 919 | 59.5 ± 6 vs 57 ± 7 | 0% | US | CAC >0 | age, BMI, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, insulin resistance | ****** | |
| Kim et al. | Cross‐sectional analysis of longitudinal cohort data | 1,575 | 40.0 ± 5.3 vs 39.8 ± 5.5 | 89.6% | US | CAC >0 | age, sex, diabetes, cholesterol, hypertension, smoking, BMI | ******* | |
| Lee et al. | Cross‐sectional | 21,335 | 40.85 ± 6.5 vs 40.15 ± 7 | 100% | US | CAC >0 | age, diabetes, HTN, smoking, physical inactivity | ********** | |
| Sinn et al. | Cohort study | 4,731 | 52.1 ± 7.2 vs 52.3 ± 7.1 | 91% | US | CAC >0 | age, sex, smoking, alcohol consumption, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes. | ******* | |
| Van Wagner et al. | Cross‐sectional analysis of longitudinal cohort data | 2,424 | 50.5 ± 3.7 vs 49.9 ± 3.6 | 42.70% | CT (L:S ratio) | CAC >0 | age, sex, race, socioeconomic level, alcohol intake, physical activity score | ********* |
NAFLD vs non‐NAFLD; †CAC vs non‐CAC; ‡ stands for study qualtiy.
Abbreviations: BP, blood pressure; CRP, C‐reative protein; DM, diabetes mellitus; HDL, high‐density lipoprotein; HTN, hypertension; LDL, low‐density lipoprotein; L:S, liver to spleen ratio; TG, triglyceride.
Figure 2Forest plot showing relationship of NAFLD with subclinical atherosclerosis.
Figure 3Forest plot showing subgroup analysis of NAFLD in studies with CAC >100 and CAC>0. Abbreviation: M‐H, Mantel‐Haenszel method.
Figure 4Forest plot showing association of ALT (top) and AST (bottom) with CAC.