Display options
Share it on

Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2014 Jan;16(1):e12669. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.12669. Epub 2014 Jan 05.

Correlation of Body Mass Index and Serum Parameters With Ultrasonographic Grade of Fatty Change in Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Iranian Red Crescent medical journal

Ghobad Abangah, Atefeh Yousefi, Rouhangiz Asadollahi, Yousef Veisani, Paria Rahimifar, Sajjad Alizadeh

Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, IR Iran.
  2. Student Research Committee, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, IR Iran.
  3. Department of Pathology, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, IR Iran.
  4. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, IR Iran.

PMID: 24719704 PMCID: PMC3964422 DOI: 10.5812/ircmj.12669

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common liver disease in the western population and expanding disease in the world. Pathological changes in fatty liver are like alcohol liver damage, which can lead to end-stage liver disease. The prevalence of NAFLD in obese or overweight people is higher than general population, and it seems that people with high Body Mass Index (BMI) or abnormality in some laboratory tests are more susceptible for severe fatty liver and high grade of NAFLD in ultrasonography (U.S).

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the correlation of BMI and laboratory tests with NAFLD in ultrasonography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: During a multi-step process, we selected two-hundred and thirteen cases from four hundred and eighteen patients with NAFLD. Laboratory tests performed included: ALT, AST, FBS, Triglyceride and cholesterol levels, hepatitis B surface antigen, hepatitis C antibody, ceruloplasmin, serum iron, TIBC, transferrin saturation, ferritin, AMA, ANA, ANTI LKM1, serum protein electrophoresis, TSH, anti TTG (IgA). BMI and ultrasonography for 213 patients were performed, and then data was analyzed. These parameters and grades of ultrasonography were compared with the values obtained using one way ANOVA. An ordinal logistic regression model was used to estimate the probability of ultrasonography grade. The Statistical Package for the Social Science program (SPSS, version 16.0) was used for data analysis.

RESULTS: Two-hundred and thirteen cases including 140 male and 73 female, were studied. In general, 72.3% of patients were overweight and obese. Post-hoc tests showed that only BMI (P < 0.001) and TG (P < 0.011) among variables had statistically significant associations with ultrasonography grade (USG), and ordinal logistic regression model showed that BMI and AST were the best predictors.

DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that in patients with NAFLD, BMI and TG are most effective factors in severity of fatty liver disease and ultrasonography grade (USG). On the other hand, BMI as a predictor can be helpful. But, AST has not been a reliable finding, because it changes in many conditions.

Keywords: Aspartate Aminotransferase; Body Mass Index; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Triglyceride; Ultrasonography

References

  1. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2009 Apr;5(2):371-4 - PubMed
  2. Ann Hepatol. 2011 Apr-Jun;10(2):125-32 - PubMed
  3. Arq Gastroenterol. 2012 Jan-Mar;49(1):89-96 - PubMed
  4. Ann Hepatol. 2007 Jul-Sep;6(3):161-3 - PubMed
  5. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2005 May;4(2):173-7 - PubMed
  6. Gastroenterology. 1999 Jun;116(6):1413-9 - PubMed
  7. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003 May;18(5):588-94 - PubMed
  8. Gastroenterology. 2003 Jan;124(1):71-9 - PubMed
  9. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006 Mar;18(3):233-7 - PubMed
  10. Radiology. 1989 Aug;172(2):389-92 - PubMed
  11. Diabetes Care. 2003 Nov;26(11):3160-7 - PubMed
  12. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2007 Dec;6(6):572-8 - PubMed
  13. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003 May;15(5):539-43 - PubMed
  14. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2005 Oct;18(5):365-70 - PubMed
  15. Circulation. 2002 Dec 17;106(25):3143-421 - PubMed
  16. J Transl Med. 2008 Nov 27;6:72 - PubMed
  17. Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:450639 - PubMed
  18. Semin Liver Dis. 2008 Nov;28(4):339-50 - PubMed
  19. Arch Iran Med. 2008 Nov;11(6):602-7 - PubMed
  20. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2012 Oct;11(5):513-20 - PubMed
  21. Clin Sci (Lond). 2008 Sep;115(5):141-50 - PubMed
  22. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2012 Aug;124(15-16):526-31 - PubMed
  23. Gastroenterology. 2002 Nov;123(5):1705-25 - PubMed
  24. Circulation. 1992 Jan;85(1):37-45 - PubMed
  25. N Engl J Med. 2002 Apr 18;346(16):1221-31 - PubMed
  26. Dig Dis Sci. 1993 Dec;38(12):2145-50 - PubMed
  27. Gastroenterology. 2002 Nov;123(5):1702-4 - PubMed
  28. J Hepatol. 2010 Apr;52(4):579-85 - PubMed
  29. Exp Diabetes Res. 2012;2012:145754 - PubMed
  30. Hepatology. 1995 Dec;22(6):1714-9 - PubMed
  31. Hepatol Res. 2014 May;44(5):515-22 - PubMed
  32. Dig Dis. 2010;28(1):155-61 - PubMed
  33. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Oct;27(10):1555-60 - PubMed
  34. Lipids. 2010 Apr;45(4):321-7 - PubMed
  35. Semin Liver Dis. 2004 Nov;24(4):349-62 - PubMed
  36. J Clin Lab Anal. 2010;24(6):376-84 - PubMed
  37. Hepatology. 2004 Oct;40(4):820-6 - PubMed
  38. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2012 Sep;28(6):535-41 - PubMed
  39. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Jan 15;126(2):137-45 - PubMed
  40. Metabolism. 2006 Dec;55(12):1604-9 - PubMed
  41. Liver Int. 2009 Jan;29(1):113-9 - PubMed
  42. Gastroenterology. 2002 Sep;123(3):745-50 - PubMed
  43. Med Pregl. 2013 Jan-Feb;66(1-2):24-31 - PubMed
  44. Diabetes Care. 2010 Jan;33 Suppl 1:S11-61 - PubMed
  45. BMC Public Health. 2010 May 10;10:237 - PubMed
  46. Semin Liver Dis. 2001;21(1):3-16 - PubMed
  47. Mod Pathol. 1998 Jun;11(6):560-5 - PubMed

Publication Types