Impact of skeletal muscle mass evaluating methods on severity of metabolic associated fatty liver disease in non-elderly adults

11Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The study aimed to explore the relationships of skeletal muscle mass with disease severity in metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) patients with different methods. Consecutive subjects undergoing bioelectrical impedance analysis were included. The steatosis grade and liver fibrosis were evaluated by MRI-derived proton density fat fraction and two-dimensional shear wave elastography. The appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) was adjusted by height2 (ASM/H2), weight (ASM/W) and BMI (ASM/BMI). Overall, 2223 subjects (50·5 %, MAFLD; 46·9 %, male) were included, with the mean age 37·4 ± 10·6 years. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the subjects with the lowest quartile (Q1) of ASM/W or ASM/BMI had higher risk ratios for MAFLD (OR (95 % CI) in male: 2·57 (1·35, 4·89), 2·11(1·22, 3·64); in female: 4·85 (2·33, 10·01), 4·81 (2·52, 9·16), all P < 0·05, all for Q1 v. Q4). The MAFLD patients with lower quartiles of ASM/W had the higher risk OR for insulin resistance (IR), both in male and female (2·14 (1·16, 3·97), 4·26 (1·29, 14·02) for Q4 v. Q1, both P < 0·05). While the significant OR were not observed when ASM/H2 and ASM/BMI were used. There were significant dose-dependent associations between decreased ASM/W as well as ASM/BMI and moderate-severe steatosis (2·85(1·54, 5·29), 1·90(1·09, 3·31), both P < 0·05) in male MAFLD patients. In conclusion, ASM/W is superior to ASM/H2 and ASM/BMI in predicting the degree of MAFLD. A lower ASM/W is associated with IR and moderate-severe steatosis in non-elderly male MAFLD.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhou, T., Ye, J., Lin, Y., Wang, W., Feng, S., Zhuo, S., & Zhong, B. (2023). Impact of skeletal muscle mass evaluating methods on severity of metabolic associated fatty liver disease in non-elderly adults. British Journal of Nutrition, 130(8), 1373–1384. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114523000399

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free