4.5 Article

Fatty liver index predicts incident diabetes in a Japanese general population with and without impaired fasting glucose

期刊

HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 48, 期 9, 页码 708-716

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/hepr.13065

关键词

diabetes; epidemiology; fatty liver index; health checkup; impaired fasting glucose

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan [H25-Jyunkankitou-Seisyu-Ippan-013, H28-Junkankitou-Ippan-003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimFatty liver is associated with the development of diabetes. However, to our knowledge, no study has examined the relationship between the fatty liver index (FLI), calculated scores of hepatic steatosis, and the development of diabetes among individuals without impaired fasting glucose (IFG). We aimed to examine whether FLI predicts the development of diabetes in individuals with and without IFG in a Japanese general population. MethodsWe selected 1498 men and 2941 women who participated in Specific Health Checkups in Japan. We divided all participants into six groups according to tertiles of FLI (low, moderate, and high) and the presence or absence of IFG, by sex. We calculated hazard ratios for incident diabetes for each group using a Cox proportional hazard model, adjusting for potential confounders. ResultsDuring a mean follow-up period of 3.0years, 176 cases of diabetes in men and 320 cases in women were identified. Compared with the low FLI group without IFG, the high FLI group without IFG was significantly associated with incident diabetes in both men (hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.36) and women (hazard ratio, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.51). All IFG groups were significantly associated with incident diabetes regardless of FLI levels. ConclusionsOur results showed that FLI is associated with the development of diabetes regardless of sex and the presence or absence of IFG, and that it may be a useful predictor of future risk of incident diabetes even in individuals without IFG.

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

4.5
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