Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33694066›Full record

ArticleHepatology international2021

Does the risk of cardiovascular events differ between biopsy-proven NAFLD and MAFLD?

Gabriel Tayguara Silveira Guerreiro, Larisse Longo, Mariana Alves Fonseca, Valessa Emanoele Gabriel de Souza, Mário Reis Álvares-da-Silva

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hepatology international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD): a multisystemic disease beyond the liver].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025
    Review
  10. The utility of an artificial intelligence model based on decision tree and evolution algorithm to evaluate steatotic liver disease in a primary care setting.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gabriel Tayguara Silveira Guerreiro *Graduate Program in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Larisse Longo *Graduate Program in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil. larisselongo@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4453-7227
Mariana Alves FonsecaGraduate Program in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Valessa Emanoele Gabriel de SouzaExperimental Laboratory of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Center for Experimental Research, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Mário Reis Álvares-da-SilvaGraduate Program in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5001-246X
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande · BRHospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background/purposeCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death among individuals with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Recently, NAFLD was renamed metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). This study aimed to compare cardiovascular risk (CVR) and CVD between patients with NAFLD and MAFLD.

methodsRetrospective cross-sectional study of biopsy-proven liver steatosis performed between 2013 and 2018 at a university hospital. Cases were divided into NAFLD or MAFLD and demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected to assess CVR (through the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk estimator and atherogenic indices) and CVD.

resultsOut of 1233 liver biopsies, 171 (13.9%) presented steatosis. Of these, 109 patients met diagnostic criteria for NAFLD (63.7%) and 154 (90.1%), for MAFLD. In the NAFLD group, 78% of the cases had steatohepatitis, 24.8% had cirrhosis, and 3.7%, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the MAFLD group, 72.7% of the cases had liver inflammatory activity, 28.6% had cirrhosis, and 13.6% had HCC. In patients with MAFLD and NAFLD, CVR was intermediate/high (36.4 and 25.7%, p = 0.209) and CVD occurred in 20.1 and 12.8% (p = 0.137) of the cases, respectively, with no influence of liver injury severity. We observed a significant increase in high 10-year CVR (p = 0.020) and CVD (p = 0.007) in patients with MAFLD and concomitant viral infection (HCV and/or HBV) compared to cases with MAFLD only.

conclusionPatients with both NAFLD and MAFLD had intermediate/high CVR, with a high rate of CVD. Patients with MAFLD and concomitant viral infection showed significantly increased CVR and CVD compared to those without viral infection.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesMetabolic DiseasesNon-alcoholic Fatty Liver DiseaseBiopsyCarcinoma, HepatocellularHumansLiver NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsASCVD risk estimatorAtherogenic ratiosCardiovascular diseasesCardiovascular riskInflammatory activityMetabolic-associated fatty liver diseaseNon-alcoholic fatty liver diseaseNon-fatal cardiovascular eventsSteatosisViral infection

Identifiers

PMID33694066
OpenAlexW3134080740

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.