3.9 Review

Renaming NAFLD to MAFLD: Advantages and Potential Changes in Diagnosis, Pathophysiology, Treatment, and Management

Journal

INFECTIOUS MICROBES & DISEASES
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 49-55

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IM9.0000000000000089

Keywords

MAFLD; NAFLD; diagnosis; pathophysiology; treatment; management

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Fund [81970545, 82170609]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province (Major Project) [ZR2020KH006]
  3. Ji'nan Science and Technology Development Project [2020190790]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, there has been an increasing prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) due to the rising incidence of obesity and other metabolic diseases. To better describe this condition, experts have proposed a more appropriate term - metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). Compared to NAFLD, MAFLD allows for a broader definition and helps exclude patients with heterogeneous liver diseases.
In recent years, with the increasing incidence of obesity and other metabolic diseases, the prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has increased and it has become a major health problem affecting more than one quarter of the world's population. Recently, experts reached a consensus that NAFLD does not reflect the current knowledge, and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) was suggested as a more appropriate term. MAFLD is not just a simple renaming of NAFLD. The definition of MAFLD allows a patient to have dual (or more) etiologies for their liver disease, which will help to exclude more heterogeneous patients. In this review, we introduce the significant differences between the definitions of NAFLD and MAFLD. In addition, we also describe the advantages of the term MAFLD in the pathophysiology, therapy, and patient management.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available