RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is comorbidity commonly presenting with fatty liver. A recently proposed definition of "metabolic associated fatty liver disease" (MAFLD) is thought to replace non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Yet, despite the significant prevalence of T2DM among fatty liver, there remains limited evidence on the impact of the change in the definition of T2DM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current study uses data from the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 1999 to 2018. Survival analysis was conducted with a cox regression and sub-distribution hazard ratio for competing risk events. RESULTS: 6727 patients had a diagnosis of T2DM. 4982 individuals with T2DM had MAFLD and 2032 were MAFLD(+)/NAFLD(-), while 2950 patients were MAFLD(+)/NAFLD(+). The new definition increased fatty liver diagnosis by 68.89%. Patients who were classified as MAFLD(+)/NAFLD(-) were at a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, advanced fibrosis, all-cause and cardiovascular-related mortality compared to MAFLD(+)/NAFLD(+). In MAFLD(+)/NAFLD(-), viral hepatitis significantly increases the odds of advanced fibrosis (OR: 6.77, CI: 3.92 to 11.7, p < 0.001) and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.75, CI: 1.29 to 2.40, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The identification and treatment of NAFLD in patients with T2DM is a major concern and the premature change to MAFLD results in an over-diagnosis of fatty liver, exaggerated mortality, and morbidity in patients with T2DM. The definition of MAFLD causes further heterogeneity in fatty liver disease/NAFLD.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico , Humanos , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/diagnóstico , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/epidemiología , Encuestas Nutricionales , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare postoperative pain associated with epi-LASIK versus photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: This prospective observer-masked randomized study included 40 eyes of 20 patients with myopia and astigmatism who received epi-LASIK (Moria Epi-K) in one eye and PRK in the contralateral eye. Corneal ablation was done using the NIDEK EC-5000 excimer laser. Patients were seen at days 1, 3, and 6 to rate their pain via three measuring tools: 1) a global subjective rating, 2) a 10-cm visual analog scale, and 3) an 11-point numeric scale of pain. RESULTS: On postoperative day 1, 19 of 20 patients reported pain in both eyes. Using the global subjective rating scale, patients reported more pain for those eyes treated by PRK. Although clinically relevant, this difference was not statistically significant (P = .56). Based on the 11-point numeric scale of pain and visual analog scale, mean pain scores were similar for both groups. On day 3, using the global subjective rating scale, 11 of 12 patients who had pain reported more in the epi-LASIK treated eye (P = .0005). In addition, epi-LASIK eyes demonstrated higher mean pain scores based on the other two scales (visual analog scale, P = .045 and 11-point numeric scale of pain, P = .023). Only 6 patients reported minimal pain on day 6. It was more frequently reported and slightly more marked in epi-LASIK eyes, but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Epi-LASIK and PRK have similar pain on postoperative day 1, but epi-LASIK demonstrated statistically more pain than PRK on days 3 and 6.