1. 2 型糖尿病合并非酒精性脂肪性肝病、进展性 肝纤维化的危险因素及其预测效能.
- Author
-
陈张哲, 葛丹, 司慧峰, 王钰哲, and 凌宏威
- Abstract
Objective To analyse the risk factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) combined with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and progressive liver fibrosis and their predictive efficacy. Methods Based on the results of abdominal ultrasound, 431 patients with T2DM were divided into 316 patients with T2DM combined with NAFLD (combined group) and 115 patients with T2DM (simple group); 316 patients with T2DM combined with NAFLD were further divided into 39 patients with progressive liver fibrosis (progressive group), 122 patients with suspected liver fibrosis (suspicious group), and 155 patients without liver fibrosis (excluded group) according to the NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS). Univariate and multifactorial Logistic regression was used to analyze of influencing factors and risk factors for T2DM combined with NAFLD and progressive liver fibrosis. The ROC curve was used to assess the predictive efficiency of the risk factors on NAFLD and progressive liver fibrosis in T2DM combined with NAFLD. Results There were significant differences in age, body mass index (BMI), white blood cell (WBC), lymphocyte (LY), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), albumin (Alb), serum urid acid (SUA), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), UHR, fasting insulin (FIns), fasting C-peptide (FC-P), and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) between the combined group and simple group (all P<0. 05); multifactorial Logistic regression analysis showed that BMI, AST, Alb, TG, UHR, and FC-P were risk factors for T2DM in combination with NAFLD. When the predicted critical value of BMI was 24. 87 kg/m2, the sensitivity of T2DM combined with NAFLD was 77. 5% and the specificity was 72. 2%; when the predicted critical value of AST was 19. 5 U/L, the sensitivity of T2DM combined with NAFLD was 56. 7% and the specificity was 78. 3%; when the predicted critical value of Alb was 4. 42 g/dL, its sensitivity was 57. 0% and specificity was 58. 3%; when the predicted critical value of TG was 1. 45 mmol/L, its sensitivity was 73. 7% and specificity was 65. 2%; when the predicted critical value of UHR was 308. 5, its sensitivity was 66. 5% and specificity was 81. 7%; when the FC-P predicted critical value was 1. 44 ng/mL, its sensitivity was 67. 1% and specificity was 63. 5% for the diagnosis of T2DM combined with NAFLD. There were significant differences in gender, age, history of hypertension, BMI, platelet (PLT), AST/ALT, GGT, Alb, total bilirubin (TBil), serum creatinine (Scr), cystatin C (Cys-C), SUA, TC, TG, HDL, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), UHR, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), FIns, FC-P, and HOMA-IR between the progressive group, suspicious group and the excluded group (all P<0. 05); multifactorial Logistic regression analysis showed that UHR, FC-P and HOMA-IR were risk factors for progressive liver fibrosis; when the predicted critical value of UHR was 313. 98, the sensitivity of the diagnosis of progressive liver fibrosis in T2DM combined with NAFLD was 84. 6% and the specificity was 54. 9%; when the predicted critical value of HOMA-IR was 5. 56, the sensitivity of the diagnosis of progressive liver fibrosis in T2DM combined with NAFLD was 69. 2% and the specificity was 72. 6%; when the the predicted critical value of FC-P was 2. 64 ng/mL, the sensitivity of the diagnosis of progressive liver fibrosis in T2DM combined with NAFLD was 53. 8%, and the specificity was 82. 3%. Conclusions BMI, AST, Alb, TG, UHR, and FC-P are risk factors for NAFLD in combination with T2DM; UHR, FC-P, and HOMA-IR are risk factors for progressive liver fibrosis in T2DM combined with NAFLD. Each index has good predictive efficacy for T2DM combined with NAFLD and for progressive liver fibrosis in T2DM combined with NAFLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF