4.2 Article

Interval increase in the prevalence of symptomatic cholelithiasis-associated non-alcoholic fatty liver disease over a ten-year period in an Asian population

期刊

SINGAPORE MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 58, 期 12, 页码 703-707

出版社

SINGAPORE MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.11622/smedj.2016189

关键词

Asian; cholelithiasis; epidemiology; non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; Singapore

向作者/读者索取更多资源

INTRODUCTION Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is frequently associated with cholelithiasis. The prevalence of NAFLD in Asia has been on the rise, but the magnitude of this increase had not been studied previously. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted on consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy from November 2001 to November 2004 (Cohort 1) and from November 2011 to November 2014 (Cohort 2) at Singapore General Hospital. Preoperative diagnostic scans (e.g. ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) and clinical data were reviewed for the presence of fatty liver. Statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS In Cohorts 1 and 2, 127 patients and 99 patients were operated on, respectively. Cohort 2 had significantly higher proportions of patients with NAFLD (56.6% vs. 40.2%; p < 0.015) and hyperlipidaemia (45.5% vs. 18.9%; p < 0.001) as compared to Cohort 1. Binary logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension (odds ratio [OR] 2.558; p < 0.004) and Indian ethnicity (OR 5.448; p < 0.043) were significantly associated with NAFLD. CONCLUSION Similar to other international studies, we found a significant increase in the prevalence of patients with NAFLD presenting symptomatically for cholecystectomy over an interval of ten years in Singapore. Hypertension and Indian ethnicity were significantly associated with NAFLD in both time periods. This trend supports the need for concerted public health intervention to stem the increasing incidence of NAFLD and prevent its progression to more advanced liver disease.

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

4.2
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