BACKGROUND & AIMS: The applicability of the novel metabolic dysfunction associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) definition has been studied in numerous cohorts and compared to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). No consensus has been reached on which definition is preferred. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to compare the epidemiological and clinical features of NAFLD and MAFLD in the general and non-general population. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase and Web of Science for studies comparing MAFLD to NAFLD. Based on MAFLD and NAFLD status, the following subgroups were investigated for liver health: overlap fatty liver disease (FLD), NAFLD-only and MAFLD-only. Data were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 17 studies comprising 9 808 677 individuals. In the general population, MAFLD was present in 33.0% (95% CI 29.7%-36.5%) and NAFLD in 29.1% (95% CI 27.1%-31.1%). Among those with FLD, 4.0% (95% CI 2.4%-6.4%) did not meet the MAFLD criteria but had NAFLD (NAFLD-only) and 15.1% (95% CI 11.5%-19.5%) was exclusively captured by the novel MAFLD definition (MAFLD-only). Notably, this MAFLD-only group was at significantly increased risk for fibrosis (RR 4.2; 95% CI 1.3-12.9) and had higher alanine aminotransferase (mean difference: 8.0 U/L, 95% CI 2.6-13.5) and aspartate aminotransferase (mean difference: 6.4 U/L, 95% CI 3.0-9.7), compared to NAFLD-only. Similar results were obtained among the non-general population. CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic dysfunction associated fatty liver disease and NAFLD are highly prevalent in the general population, with considerable overlap between them. However, compared to NAFLD, significantly more individuals were additionally identified by MAFLD than were missed. Importantly, by using the MAFLD criteria, more individuals with liver damage were identified. Therefore, the novel MAFLD definition is superior to NAFLD on a population level.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The applicability of the novel metabolic dysfunction associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) definition has been studied in numerous cohorts and compared to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). No consensus has been reached on which definition is preferred. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to compare the epidemiological and clinical features of NAFLD and MAFLD in the general and non-general population. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase and Web of Science for studies comparing MAFLD to NAFLD. Based on MAFLD and NAFLD status, the following subgroups were investigated for liver health: overlap fatty liver disease (FLD), NAFLD-only and MAFLD-only. Data were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 17 studies comprising 9 808 677 individuals. In the general population, MAFLD was present in 33.0% (95% CI 29.7%-36.5%) and NAFLD in 29.1% (95% CI 27.1%-31.1%). Among those with FLD, 4.0% (95% CI 2.4%-6.4%) did not meet the MAFLD criteria but had NAFLD (NAFLD-only) and 15.1% (95% CI 11.5%-19.5%) was exclusively captured by the novel MAFLD definition (MAFLD-only). Notably, this MAFLD-only group was at significantly increased risk for fibrosis (RR 4.2; 95% CI 1.3-12.9) and had higher alanine aminotransferase (mean difference: 8.0 U/L, 95% CI 2.6-13.5) and aspartate aminotransferase (mean difference: 6.4 U/L, 95% CI 3.0-9.7), compared to NAFLD-only. Similar results were obtained among the non-general population. CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic dysfunction associated fatty liver disease and NAFLD are highly prevalent in the general population, with considerable overlap between them. However, compared to NAFLD, significantly more individuals were additionally identified by MAFLD than were missed. Importantly, by using the MAFLD criteria, more individuals with liver damage were identified. Therefore, the novel MAFLD definition is superior to NAFLD on a population level.
Authors: João Paulo Margiotti Dos Santos; Mariana Canevari de Maio; Monike Alves Lemes; Lucas Fornari Laurindo; Jesselina Francisco Dos Santos Haber; Marcelo Dib Bechara; Pedro Sidnei do Prado; Eduardo Costa Rauen; Fernando Costa; Barbara Cristina de Abreu Pereira; Uri Adrian Prync Flato; Ricardo de Alvares Goulart; Eduardo Federighi Baisi Chagas; Sandra Maria Barbalho Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-01-02 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Theodoros Androutsakos; Theodoros A Voulgaris; Athanasios-Dimitrios Bakasis; Maria-Loukia Koutsompina; Loukas Chatzis; Ourania D Argyropoulou; Vasilis Pezoulas; Dimitrios I Fotiadis; George Papatheodoridis; Athanasios G Tzioufas; Andreas V Goules Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 8.786