4.8 Article

Liver stiffness not fatty liver disease is associated with atrial fibrillation: The Rotterdam study

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEPATOLOGY
卷 77, 期 4, 页码 931-938

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2022.05.030

关键词

Liver stiffness; atrial fibrillation; coronary heart disease; NAFLD; MAFLD; steatosis

资金

  1. Erasmus Medical Center and Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Netherlands Organization for the Health Research and Development (ZonMw)
  2. Research institute for Diseases in the Elderly (Ride)
  3. Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
  4. Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sports, the European Commission (DG XII)
  5. Municipality of Rotterdam
  6. Foundation for Liver and Gastrointestinal Research, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
  7. Gender and Prevention grant
  8. ZonMw [555003017]
  9. China Scholarship Council (CSC) [201906940022]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Liver stiffness is significantly associated with atrial fibrillation, especially in individuals without fatty liver disease. Conversely, there is no clear association between fatty liver disease and atrial fibrillation.
Background & Aims: Fatty liver disease has become the most prevalent chronic liver disease globally and is linked to cardio-vascular disease, including arrhythmias. However, there have been inconsistent reports on the association between fatty liver disease and atrial fibrillation, while the role of liver stiffness in this association remains unclear. Methods: Within the Rotterdam Study, a large prospective ongoing cohort, participants attending the abdominal ultrasound program between 2009-2014 were included. Exclusion criteria were no atrial fibrillation data or >20% missing data across analysis variables. Steatosis was assessed by ultrasound, liver stiffness by transient elastography and atrial fibrillation by 12 -lead electrocardiograms. Incident atrial fibrillation was based on medical records and complete until 2014. Logistic and Cox -regression were used to quantify associations between fatty liver disease and atrial fibrillation. Results: We included 5,825 participants (aged 69.5 +/- 9.1, 42.9% male), 35.7% had steatosis, liver stiffness measurement was available in 73.3%, and 7.0% had prevalent atrial fibrillation. Steatosis was not associated with prevalent atrial fibrillation in fully adjusted models (odds ratio [OR] 0.80; 95% CI 0.62-1.03), findings were consistent for non-alcoholic or metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease. Liver stiffness was significantly associated with prevalent atrial fibrillation (OR 1.09 per kPa, 95% CI 1.03-1.16); however, this was only persistent among those without steatosis (OR 1.18 per kPa, 95% CI 1.08-1.29). Lastly, no associations were found between steatosis (hazard ratio 0.88; 95% CI 0.59-1.33; follow-up 2.1 [1.1-3.2] years) and incident atrial fibrillation. Conclusions: Fatty liver disease was not associated with preva-lent or incident atrial fibrillation, while liver stiffness was significantly associated with atrial fibrillation, especially among those without steatosis. This association might be driven by venous congestion instead of fibrogenesis, but this awaits further validation. We recommend assessing cardiovascular health in participants with high liver stiffness, especially in the absence of overt liver disease. Clinical trial number: NTR6831. Lay summary: There have been inconsistent reports about the potential links between fatty liver disease and atrial fibril-lation (an irregular and often very fast heart rhythm). Herein, we show that liver stiffness (which is a marker of liver fibrosis), but not fatty liver disease, was associated with a higher prev-alence of atrial fibrillation. We hypothesis that atrial fibrillation, rather than fibrosis, may be the cause of increased liver stiffness in participants without overt liver disease. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Euro-pean Association for the Study of the Liver. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据