4.7 Article

Relationship between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and muscle quality as well as quantity evaluated by computed tomography

Journal

LIVER INTERNATIONAL
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 120-130

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/liv.14253

Keywords

muscle area; muscle attenuation; muscle quality; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background & Aims Sarcopenia is reported to be associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Evaluation of skeletal muscle attenuation and area by computed tomography (CT) may represent a promising approach for evaluation of the risk of NAFLD. We examined the association between skeletal muscle characteristics and NAFLD and investigated the combined effect of these parameters on the prevalence of NAFLD. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we analysed data from 632 middle-aged Japanese subjects without daily alcohol intake (353 men and 279 women) from a cohort of employees undergoing annual health examinations. The cross-sectional skeletal muscle area was evaluated on the basis of CT data at the level of the third lumbar vertebrae, and the skeletal muscle index (SMI) and density (SMD) were calculated. The subjects were divided into four study groups according to their SMI and SMD relative to median values. Results One hundred forty men and forty-three women had NAFLD. Total SMI (odds ratio [OR] per 1.0 cm(2)/kg/m(2) increase 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.64 in men and OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.10-0.42 in women) and total SMD (OR, per 1.0 Hounsfield Unit increase 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.93 in men and 0.88, 0.82-0.95 in women) were significantly associated with the prevalence of NAFLD after adjusting for covariates. The subgroup with simultaneous presence of low SMI and low SMD was associated with a significantly higher prevalence of NAFLD compared with other groups. Conclusions Both SMI and SMD are independently associated with the prevalence of NAFLD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available