4.3 Review

Increased arterial stiffness in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000909

关键词

arterial stiffness; augmentation index; meta-analysis; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; pulse wave velocity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Arterial function is a marker of early atherosclerotic changes and cardiovascular disease. Several studies have suggested the possible association between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and increased arterial stiffness. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to better characterize this association. Patients and methods A comprehensive search of the databases of the MEDLINE and EMBASE was carried out from inception through September 2016. All observational studies that compared arterial stiffness between NAFLD patients and healthy controls were included. Arterial stiffness was measured by pulse wave velocity (PWV) and augmentation index. We calculated pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the random-effects model. Results Data were extracted from 12 studies involving 9351 NAFLD patients and 17 684 controls. NAFLD is significantly associated with increased arterial stiffness as determined by carotid-femoral PWV (MD = 0.75 m/s, 95% CI: 0.43-1.07, I-2= 88%), brachial-ankle PWV (MD = 0.82 m/s, 95% CI: 0.57-1.07, I-2= 92%), and augmentation index (pooled MD=2.54%, 95% CI: 0.07-5.01, I-2= 73%) compared with healthy controls. Conclusion In conclusion, our study demonstrated a higher degree of arterial stiffness in NAFLD patients compared with controls. However, this association might be related to the higher prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors in NAFLD patients. Further studies are needed to determine an independent association between NAFLD and arterial stiffness adjusting to cardiometabolic risks. Copyright (C) 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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