Topic Highlight Open Access
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 28, 2014; 20(24): 7718-7729
Published online Jun 28, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i24.7718
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Updates in noninvasive diagnosis and correlation with cardiovascular disease
Kuang-Chun Hu, Horng-Yuan Wang, Chuan-Chuan Liu, Shou-Chuan Shih, Mackay Medical College, New Taipei City 25245, Taiwan
Kuang-Chun Hu, Horng-Yuan Wang, Chuan-Chuan Liu, Shou-Chuan Shih, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Health Evaluation Center, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei 10449, Taiwan
Sung-Chen Liu, Division of Endocrine, Department of Internal Medicine, DM Center, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei 10449, Taiwan
Chung-Lieh Hung, Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei 10449, Taiwan
Ming-Jong Bair, Gastroenterology Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taitung Branch, Taitung 10449, Taiwan
Kuang-Chun Hu, Chun-Jen Liu, Ming-Shiang Wu, Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei 10051, Taiwan
Author contributions: Shih SC and Liu CJ contributed equally to this work; Wang HY, Liu SC, Liu CC, Bair MJ and Wu MS designed the research and article review; Hung CL designed the cardiovascular disease research and article review; and Hu KC analyzed the article and wrote the paper.
Correspondence to: Dr. Shou-Chuan Shih, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Health Evaluation Center, Mackay Memorial Hospital, No.92, Sec. 2, Chung-Shan North Road, Taipei 10449, Taiwan. shihshou@gmail.com
Telephone: +886-2-25433535 Fax: +886-2-25433642
Received: October 19, 2013
Revised: January 10, 2014
Accepted: April 1, 2014
Published online: June 28, 2014

Abstract

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) refers to the accumulation of fat (mainly triglycerides) within hepatocytes. Approximately 20%-30% of adults in the general population in developed countries have NAFLD; this trend is increasing because of the pandemicity of obesity and diabetes, and is becoming a serious public health burden. Twenty percent of individuals with NAFLD develop chronic hepatic inflammation [nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)], which can be associated with the development of cirrhosis, portal hypertension, and hepatocellular carcinoma in a minority of patients. And thus, the detection and diagnosis of NAFLD is important for general practitioners. Liver biopsy is the gold standard for diagnosing NAFLD and confirming the presence of NASH. However, the invasiveness of this procedure limits its application to screening the general population or patients with contraindications for liver biopsy. The development of noninvasive diagnostic methods for NAFLD is of paramount importance. This review focuses on the updates of noninvasive diagnosis of NAFLD. Besides, we review clinical evidence supporting a strong association between NAFLD and the risk of cardiovascular disease because of the cross link between these two disorders.

Key Words: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, Noninvasive diagnosis, Laboratory biochemistry, Image assessment, Cardiovascular disease

Core tip: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) refers to the accumulation of fat within hepatocytes and is becoming a serious public health burden. Some patients with NAFLD develop chronic hepatic inflammation, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Detection and diagnosis of NAFLD is important and liver biopsy is the gold standard for diagnosing NAFLD. However, the invasiveness of this procedure limits its application. The development of noninvasive diagnostic methods for NAFLD is importance. This review focuses on the updates of noninvasive diagnosis of NAFLD. Besides, we review clinical evidence supporting association between NAFLD and the risk of cardiovascular disease because of the cross link between these two disorders.



INTRODUCTION

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common chronic liver disease that has a range of clinical presentations ranging from steatosis alone to steatosis with inflammation, necrosis, fibrosis, or cirrhosis[1]. NAFLD is now well documented in many countries. The worldwide prevalence of NAFLD in the general population is 15%-40% in Western countries[2]. According to the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of the United States population, the prevalence of hepatosteatosis and NAFLD was 21.4% and 19.0%, respectively[3-5]. The community prevalence of NAFLD in the East has been reported at 20% (China), 27% (Hong Kong), and 15%-45% (South Asia, South-East Asia, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan), which is similar to the data obtained in the Western surveys[6-9].

In earlier studies, the liver prognosis of NAFLD was rated as remarkably benign[10] and unimpressive[11]. However, recent studies showed that patients with NAFLD, both adults and children, usually meet the diagnostic criteria for metabolic syndrome, such as abdominal obesity, hypertension, atherogenic dyslipidemia, and dysglycemia[12]. Metabolic syndrome features are established risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD)[13]. A growing body of evidence suggests that, in addition to the potential progression of liver diseases, NAFLD is associated with an increased risk for CVD[14]. Adams et al[15] demonstrated in a retrospective, community-based cohort of 420 patients with NAFLD who were followed up for a mean of 7.6 years that the rate of death by any cause (the most common being CVD or cancer) was higher among patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) or cirrhosis than in the general population. Rafiq et al[16] found that CVD was the most frequent cause of death in 173 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD who were followed up for 13 years. Due to the clinically significant association between NAFLD and the development of CVD, we need to identify those subjects at risk of developing NAFLD.

Although liver biopsy remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of NAFLD, a pathological diagnosis is often not possible in community-based research studies and clinical practice settings because of the invasiveness, associated discomfort, and risks[17]. Therefore, studies have focused on whether noninvasive methods can detect clinically significant steatosis, fibrosis, or cirrhosis, or can discriminate between simple steatosis and NASH in patients with NAFLD[18]. Imaging studies such as ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been used to diagnose NAFLD. These modalities have the advantages of being noninvasive and can be repetitively performed over time. A number of biomarkers have been developed to differentiate between simple steatosis and NASH[19,20]. The definitions of statistics terms and imaging techniques in this review article had been demonstrated in Table 1. This review focuses on the updates of noninvasive diagnostic methods of NAFLD and the clinical evidence that supports a strong association between NAFLD and the risk of CVD. Because of the link between the two disorders, awareness and careful surveillance of these patients has become important.

Table 1 Definitions of statistics terms and imaging techniques.
TermsDefinition
Area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC)The AUROC is a measure of how well a parameter can distinguish between two diagnostic groups (diseased/normal)
AccuracyConsists of Trueness (proximity of measurement results to the true value) and Precision (repeatability or reproducibility of the measurement)
Negative predictive valueProportion of people with a negative test who are free of the target disorder
Positive predictive valueProportion of people with a positive test who have the target disorder
SensitivityProportion of people with the target disorder who have a positive test result
SpecificityProportion of people without the target disorder who have a negative test
Imaging techniques
Ultrasonography-based transient elastography (FibroScan)Technique whereby shear waves, at a low frequency of 50 Hz, are created by a vibrating probe and transducer applied to the skin overlying the liver
Acoustic radiation force impulseUse of shear acoustic waves remotely induced by the radiation force of a focused ultrasonic beam
Magnetic resonance imaging-based Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopyQuantifies hepatosteatosis by measuring proton signals from the acyl groups of hepatocyte triglyceride stores
Magnetic resonance elastographyObtained by depicting the propagated shear waves, and images of the shear waves are analyzed and used to generate the elastogram
UPDATES IN NONINVASIVE DIAGNOSIS OF NAFLD
Laboratory biochemistry

Clinicians often suspect NAFLD on the basis of commonly available clinical information and biochemistry results. Elevated aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels are found to correlate with liver fibrosis in patients with hepatosteatosis, inflammation, or fibrosis, although these levels are uncommonly > 4 times the upper limit of normal (ULN)[21]. Among nearly 1000 morbidly obese subjects undergoing gastrointestinal bariatric surgery in Italy, an AST or ALT level > 2 times the ULN had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 21% for bridging fibrosis and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93%[22].

Although ALT levels tend to be higher in patients with NAFLD than in those without NAFLD, population cohort studies have demonstrated that ALT levels are within normal limits in nearly 80% of patients with fatty liver[23]. Furthermore, Mofrad et al[24] reported on histological changes among patients with raised and normal ALT levels. Therefore, the association between ALT levels and fibrosis is inconsistent and cannot sufficiently predict fibrosis stage in individual patients. This means that NASH and advanced fibrosis cannot be excluded on the basis of a normal ALT level. In contrast, the association between an elevated AST/ALT ratio and fibrosis has been recognized in chronic liver disease and may reflect impaired AST clearance by sinusoidal cells in the liver[25]. In patients with NAFLD without advanced fibrosis, the AST/ALT ratio is typically < 1, but it tends to reverse as the degree of fibrosis progresses to bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis[26].

Serum γ-glutamyltransferase (γ-GT) activity is a sensitive but non-specific marker of NAFLD. Four γ-GT fractions (big, medium, small, and free γ-GT) have been described in humans. Franzini et al[27] reported that the big fraction (b-γ-GT) showed the highest diagnostic accuracy for NAFLD, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.85; cut-off, 2.6 U/L; sensitivity, 74%; and specificity, 81%. This report also showed increasing b-γ-GT levels in NAFLD but not in chronic hepatitis C. Several series have shown that the diagnostic net was expanded to include ALT, alkaline phosphatase, with an increased sensitivity (53%), but a decreased specificity to 75% for steatosis and 50% for steatohepatitis. An elevated transaminase level had a PPV of 90% for NAFLD and 34% for NASH (Table 2)[28,29].

Table 2 Accuracy of noninvasive diagnosis methods for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
Cutoff valueAUROCSensitivity (%)Specificity (%)PPV (%)NPV (%)Ref.
Biomarkers
Morbidly obese and AST, ALT2 times of ULN---2191[22]
big-γ GT2.6 U/L0.85748183.771.2[27]
CK-18 M30 antigen121.6 IU/L0.7876097.496.467.3[48]
CK-18 M65 antigen243.82 IU/L0.80968.981.681.668.9[48]
PIIINP6.6 ng/mL-80686085[51]
Predictive Models
APRI0.980.8575863493[55]
FIB-41.300.8685653695[59]
Image assessment
Transient elastography (TE; FibroScan )6.7 kPa0.8777.586.794.854.9[66]
ARFI1.2 m/s0.8476.986.795.754.1[66]
Combine TE and ARFITE > 6.7 kPa ARFI > 1.2 m/s-60.593.396.841.4[66]
MRE2.74 kPa0.9394738589[71]

In summary, although no single laboratory test can diagnose NAFLD and laboratory biochemistry examination as a population-based screening test has its pitfalls, it continues to be commonly used in clinical practice to stratify patients with appropriate risk factors for NAFLD for further investigations. Most subjects with NAFLD have an ALT value < 250 IU/L, and values > 300 IU/L warrant a search for additional or alternative causes of ALT elevation.

PRO-INFLAMMATORY AND INFLAMMATORY MARKERS

NAFLD has a strong connection with obesity and is associated with a chronic and subacute inflammatory state that is both systemic and focally localized in certain tissues such as the liver. Subjects with NAFLD associated with inflammation have elevated serum pro-inflammatory cytokine levels[30]. NASH, a progressive form of NAFLD, is reasonably easy to distinguish from simple hepatosteatosis using pro-inflammatory biomarkers. Pro-inflammatory and inflammatory markers used to diagnose NASH in recent studies are detailed below.

Adiponectin

Adiponectin is an insulin sensitizing anti-inflammatory adipocytokine, and its level is reduced in insulin-resistant states such as obesity and diabetes. Hypoadiponectinemia might represent a risk factor for NAFLD. A meta-analysis of 27 studies including 2243 subjects (698 controls and 1545 patients with NAFLD) was performed. Controls had higher serum adiponectin levels than patients with NAFLD or NASH[31]. Adiponectin levels are also decreased inverse proportionally with increases in NAFLD; in subjects at high risk of developing NAFLD, adiponectin values were approximately 40% lower than in those in subjects at low risk of developing NAFLD[32]. However, the association of adiponectin level with NASH or necroinflammatory activity is inconclusive and the relevance of low adiponectin levels to the development of NAFLD requires further investigation.

C-reactive protein

C-reactive protein (CRP) is a well-known acute-phase reactant protein with reportedly elevated levels in metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes. Serum CRP levels were significantly higher in patients with simple steatosis or hepatosteatosis than in healthy controls (7.5 ± 1.6 mg/dL and 5.2 ± 2.5 mg/dL vs 2.9 ± 0.5 mg/dL; P < 0.01). However, the study was limited by the lack of histologic diagnosis since NAFLD was diagnosed based on elevated ALT levels and an ultrasound evaluation of fatty liver. Whether CRP level can be used to differentiate NASH from simple steatosis is controversial[33]. Furthermore, a small cohort study reported no correlation of CRP levels with hepatosteatosis degree, inflammation, or liver fibrosis stage despite significantly higher CRP levels in patients with NASH[34]. According to the above studies, CRP may be a marker of hepatosteatosis but not of NASH severity. However, further studies are needed[35].

Ferritin

Increased ferritin but normal transferrin saturation is frequently found in patients with hepatosteatosis. Hyperferritinemia and iron stores have been associated with liver damage severity in patients with NAFLD, and iron depletion reduces insulin resistance and liver enzyme levels[36]. Kowdley et al[37] demonstrated that the histological features of NAFLD were more severe among patients with serum ferritin levels > 1.5 times the ULN (i.e., women, > 300; men, > 450 ng/mL), including steatosis, fibrosis, hepatocellular ballooning, and the diagnosis of NASH (P < 0.026). On multiple regression analysis, a serum ferritin level > 1.5 times ULN was independently associated with hepatic iron deposition, a diagnosis of NASH, worsened histological activity, and was an independent predictor of advanced hepatic fibrosis among patients with NAFLD (OR = 1.66; 95%CI: 1.05-2.62; P = 0.028). These data indicate that the incorporation of serum ferritin level may improve the performance of noninvasive scoring of liver damage in patients with NAFLD. Serum ferritin level is an inexpensive and convenient clinical test that could be included in the laboratory evaluation of patients with NAFLD (Table 3).

Table 3 Analysis of laboratory biomarkers associated with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
BiomarkersOR95%CIP valueRef.
Ferritin1.5 times of ULN1.661.05-2.620.028[37]
Adiponectinper μg/mL increased0.780.64-0.960.020[41]
TNF-αper μg/mL increased2.501.1-5.70.030[41]
IL-6> 4.81 pg/mL33.7021.699-680.6680.022[43]
HOMA-IR> 2.042.331.00-5.420.050[53]
Interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-a

The factors causing the progression of NAFLD to fibrosis and cirrhosis have not been defined in humans; however, a growing body of evidence supports the central role of pro-inflammatory cytokines, particularly tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), in the development of NASH[38,39]. TNF-α is a major inflammatory hepatic cytokine that is also secreted by adipose tissue and antagonizes the effects of adiponectin. IL-6 is another key pro-inflammatory hepatic cytokine that has been implicated in the pathogenesis of insulin resistance[40]. TNF-α has been found to be associated with NASH and necroinflammatory grade in Chinese and Norwegian patients with NASH[41]. IL-6 expression was markedly increased in the livers of patients with NASH compared to patients with simple steatosis (P < 0.005)[42]. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified an IL-6 level of > 4.81 pg/mL (OR = 33.7; 95%CI: 1.7-680.7; P≤ 0.022) as an independent predictor of the degree of steatosis and NASH[43].

In summary, a variety of pro-inflammatory biomarkers such as adiponectin, TNF-α, IL-6, CRP, and ferritin have been studied for their associations with NASH. Serum ferritin level could help differentiate between NAFLD and NASH: specifically, a serum ferritin level > 1.5 times the ULN may indicate the presence of NASH. The performance of other pro-inflammatory and inflammatory biomarkers in distinguishing NASH from simple steatosis might be useful. The fact that the progression of NAFLD and NASH increases CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α levels and decreases adiponectin levels in the serum suggested a connection between NAFLD and CVD; therefore, further evaluation of the association between each pro-inflammatory marker and NASH is mandatory (Table 3).

Cell death marker-cytokeratin-18

Apoptosis is a common mechanism of liver injury. The apoptotic pathway is composed of two arms: the intrinsic pathway (initiated by cellular stress) and the extrinsic pathway (stimulated through a death receptor-mediated process). Both pathways are suspected to be involved in the pathogenesis of NASH[44]. Cytokeratin-18 (CK-18) fragments result from the apoptosis of hepatocytes degraded by the enzyme caspase 3. CK-18 fragments can be identified in liver tissue using immunostaining or in plasma using monoclonal antibodies. Hepatic apoptosis is increased in patients with NASH compared to those with simple steatosis and can be measured in the plasma through CK-18 fragments[45]. CK-18 fragment levels are higher in patients with NASH than in those with simple steatosis, and decreased with weight loss induced by bariatric surgery.

In this multicenter study, every 50 U/L increase in the plasma CK-18 level increased the likelihood of biopsy-demonstrated NASH by 30%[46]. Different groups have found that the accuracy of CK-18 fragments (included M30 antigen and M65 antigen) for determining NASH, the AUROC being around 0.71-0.93[47-49]. Feldstein et al[49] recently showed that CK-18 fragment levels are useful biomarkers for NASH in children. CK-18 levels were significantly higher in subjects with NASH than in those without NASH (322.1 ± 104.8 U/L vs 164.2 ± 62 U/L; P < 0.001). In children, for every 10 U/L increase in CK-18 levels, the likelihood of having NASH increased by 70% after adjusting for multiple confounders. This means that in children with NASH, CK-18 levels can reflect greater liver fibrosis severity. The limitation of this study was its cross-sectional design, which did not allow the use of CK-18 to monitor disease progression. Long-term follow-up of this group of younger patients was indicated to further evaluate the association between CK-18 level and NASH status (Table 2).

Fibrogenesis serum marker-terminal peptide of pro-collagen 3

Hepatic fibrosis is a dynamic process that involves a complex interaction between enzymes involved in extracellular matrix synthesis and degradation. Extracellular matrix components such as hyaluronic acid, collagen components [type 4 collagen and terminal peptide of procollagen III (PIIINP)], and laminin circulate in the serum at low levels and have been examined both in isolation and in combination as potential predictors of liver fibrosis in NAFLD[50]. PIIINP is the only marker associated with a histological diagnosis of NASH in both cohorts (derivation and validation) after multivariate analysis[51]. PIIINP is also correlated with the total NAFLD activity score (NAS) and its constituent components (P < 0.001). The AUROC for PIIINP in discriminating between NASH and simple steatosis was 0.77-0.82 in patients with F0-2 fibrosis and 0.82-0.84 in patients with F0-3 fibrosis. PIIINP could discriminate between patients with simple steatosis and those with NASH or advanced fibrosis with an AUROC of 0.85-0.87. In the F0-2 portion of both cohorts, PIIINP at the thresholds of 6.6, 7.2, and 11.0 ng/mL were found to have a sensitivity of 80%, specificity of 80%, and PPV of 45%-80%, respectively. The lower threshold of 6.6 ng/mL with 80% sensitivity could be used to exclude patients with NASH and higher thresholds of 7.6 or 11 ng/mL could be used to confirm suspected NASH or advanced fibrosis. PIIINP may discriminate between simple steatosis and NASH or advanced fibrosis[51].

Comparing pro-inflammatory and inflammatory markers, CK-18 and PIIINP had better accuracy for distinguishing NASH from simple steatosis. However, the methods to detect these two kinds of markers were expensive and might not be applicable in a large community screening. Noninvasive biomarkers or panels that are cheaper, reliable, and reproducible are needed to establish a diagnostic strategy in patients with NASH (Table 2).

PREDICTIVE MODELS OF NASH

Since individual clinical or biochemical markers are not sufficiently accurate for predicting the presence of NASH, multiple parameters have been combined into mathematical models to increase diagnostic accuracy.

Homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance

The homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance formula, which is based on fasting glucose and insulin levels, is a less invasive and labor-intensive method as well as a reliable substitute for assessing IR. A recent study showed higher HOMA-IR scores in patients with NAFLD than in control groups (3.90 ± 2.75 vs 1.65 ± 1.10; P < 0.001)[52]. Using a multivariate analysis, Wang et al[53] revealed that upper-quartile HOMA-IR scores were positively associated with NAFLD (OR = 2.33 and 95%CI: 1.00-5.42; P = 0.050) (Table 3). Furthermore, Shimada et al[54] used combination of serum adiponectin level, HOMA-IR, and serum type IV collagen 7S level to predict early-stage NASH, and found a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 74%.

AST-to-platelet ratio index

Another combination of laboratory tests as a marker of advanced fibrosis is the AST-to-platelet ratio index (APRI), which was first proposed as a marker of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Kruger et al[55] found that APRI values were significantly higher in advanced fibrosis group. The AUROC for APRI was 0.85 with an optimal cut-off of 0.98, giving a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 86%. In a group of pediatric patients, the APRI significantly differed between patients with mild and significant fibrosis (0.67 ± 0.54 vs 0.78 ± 0.38; P = 0.032). The AUROC of APRI was 0.70, whereas the AST/ALT ratio was 0.53. APRI was superior to AST/ALT for predicting the presence of advanced fibrosis (Table 2)[56].

Fibrosis-4 score

The fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score was originally developed to predict advanced fibrosis in patients co-infected with hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus. The FIB-4 score is calculated as follows: age (years) × AST (U/L)/platelet (× 109/L) × ALT [U/L][57]. The FIB-4 score was validated in a database of 541 patients with NAFLD. Using a cut-off of < 1.30, the PPV was only 43% but the NPV was 90%, suggesting that the FIB-4 index may be useful for excluding patients without advanced fibrosis[58]. The FIB-4 score had the best diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis (AUROC = 0.86). To exclude advanced fibrosis, liver biopsy could potentially be avoided in 62% of patients with FIB-4. Similarly, liver biopsy could have been avoided in > 50% of patients using the FIB-4 and NAFLD fibrosis scores with similar accuracy (Table 2)[59].

IMAGE ASSESSMENT OF NAFLD

Conventional ultrasonography, CT, and MRI scanning are reliable for the noninvasive detection of moderate to severe fatty changes in the liver. Hepatic fat causes increased echogenicity on ultrasound compared with the lower echogenicity of the spleen or renal cortex. In CT scans, the fatty liver is hypodense and appears darker than the spleen. These imaging studies have a good level of accuracy in detecting cirrhosis with portal hypertension. However, they are far less reliable for detecting NASH and the associated stages of fibrosis. New imaging technologies such as the ultrasonography-based transient elastography (FibroScan, Echosens, Paris, France) and acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) and MRI-based Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) offer promise in determining severity of liver fibrosis associated with NASH.

Ultrasound-based FibroScan and ARFI

The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography for detecting fatty infiltration decreases as body mass index (BMI) increases; thus, they vary (49%-100% and 75%-95%, respectively)[60]. One study recently evaluated the use of the novel FibroScan (Echosens) for diagnosing liver fibrosis among a multitude of liver diseases[61]. The first clinical data from transient elastography were published in 2002[62]. Transient elastography is a technique in which shear waves, at a low frequency of 50 Hz, are created by a vibrating probe and a transducer applied to the skin overlying the liver. A meta-analysis study showed the mean AUROC for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis, severe fibrosis, and cirrhosis as 0.84 (95%CI: 0.82-0.86), 0.89 (95%CI: 0.88-0.91), and 0.94 (95%CI: 0.93-0.95), respectively[61].

However, studies have shown that a BMI > 28 kg/m2 is an independent risk factor for failure of the transient elastography measurement of NAFLD. Successful measurement could only be obtained in 75% of obese patients with a BMI ≥ 28 kg/m2, leaving 25% of obese patients without a noninvasive diagnosis with the use of a standard probe (M probe)[63]. Because of the poor accuracy of the M probe of transient elastography in detecting liver fibrosis in overweight/obese patients, a new XL probe has been developed and recently evaluated in large studies[64].

In a group of 274 patients with chronic liver disease of different etiologies with a BMI ≥ 28 kg/m2, transient elastography failure occurred less frequently with the XL probe than with the M probe (1.1% vs 16%), whereas the XL probe was more reliable (73% vs 50%; both P < 0.00005). The AUROC of the XL and M probes were similar for ≥ F2 fibrosis (0.83 vs 0.86; P = 0.19) and cirrhosis (0.94 vs 0.91; P = 0.28)[64].

Since a high BMI will affect the accuracy of detecting liver stiffness and transient elastography is expensive, some authors have suggested the use of other techniques such as ARFI to screen for NASH. ARFI is easily implementable on standard ultrasound machines and can give a precise, noninvasive assessment of fibrosis in chronic liver disease while minimizing the number of unreliable examinations even in patients with a high BMI[65].

Sporea et al[66] combined two ultrasound-based elastography methods (ARFI and FibroScan) and calculated their respective sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection. By combining the results of the two elastography methods for predicting significant fibrosis (F ≥ 2; FibroScan ≥ 6.7 kPa and ARFI ≥ 1.2 m/s), they obtained a 60.5% sensitivity, 93.3% specificity, 96.8% PPV, 41.4% NPV, and 68% accuracy, whereas for predicting cirrhosis (FibroScan ≥ 12.2 kPa and ARFI ≥ 1.8 m/s), they obtained a 84.9% sensitivity, 94.4% specificity, 84.9% PPV, 94.4% NPV, and 91.8% accuracy (Table 2). Thus, they suggest that the use of the FibroScan in combination with ARFI is highly specific for predicting significant fibrosis. Interestingly, Sporea et al[66] also stated that the combined use of the two ultrasonography-based elastographic methods to evaluate liver fibrosis may decrease the need for liver biopsy.

Magnetic resonance-based - 1H-MRS and MRE

The development of noninvasive 1H-MRS has led to significant advances in the measurement of lean tissue lipid content. Since NAFLD refers to the accumulation of fat (mainly triglycerides) in hepatocytes, 1H-MRS quantifies hepatosteatosis by measuring proton signals from the acyl groups of hepatocyte triglyceride stores[67]. The measurement is reproducible and correlates well with the degree of hepatosteatosis determined histologically. In Johnson’s study, the lipid saturation indices were measured using 1H-MRS. Hepatic triglyceride concentration (HTGC) and composition were then measured in healthy lean men, obese men with normal HTGC, and obese men with hepatosteatosis. The lipid saturation degree was significantly higher in obese men with hepatosteatosis and obese men with normal HTGC than in healthy lean men (0.970 ± 0.004 and 0.944 ± 0.008 vs 0.818 ± 0.025; P < 0.01). The conventional Dixon in- and out-of-phase (IOP) method can calculate MRI fat fraction was shown in previous studies to correlate well with hepatic steatosis. The development of the MRI-determined proton-density fat-fraction technique further improves upon the Dixon IOP method by minimizing T1 bias and correcting T2 decay, plus it allows for fat mapping of the entire liver in which longitudinal individual segment changes of liver fat can be accurately quantified and small differences can be detected[68].

MRE combines MRI imaging with sound waves to create a visual map (elastogram) that shows the stiffness (elasticity) of the body tissues. MRE estimates the mean degree of liver fibrosis throughout the liver parenchyma by assessing the propagation of mechanical waves through the tissue. MRE images are obtained by depicting the propagated shear waves, and images of the shear waves are analyzed and used to generate the elastogram[69].

MRE has been shown to increase systematically along with fibrosis stage. With a shear stiffness cut-off of 3.05 kPa, the predicted sensitivity and specificity for differentiating liver fibrosis (F ≥ 2) from mild fibrosis (F1) were 89.7% and 87.1%, respectively. MRE could also discriminate between patients with severe fibrosis (F3) and those with liver cirrhosis (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 92.2%) with a shear stiffness cut-off value of 5.32 kPa[70]. Chen et al[71] further evaluated NASH using MRE. Liver stiffness had high accuracy (AUROC = 0.93) for discriminating patients with NASH from those with simple steatosis, with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity 73% using a threshold of 2.74 kPa. Hepatic stiffness measurements using MRE can help identify individuals with NASH even before fibrosis onset (Table 2).

SUSPECTED CORRELATION BETWEEN NAFLD AND CVD
Epidemiology of CVD in NAFLD

The relationship between metabolic syndrome and NAFLD is now recognized, and the possible role of NAFLD in CVD development has become a concern to clinicians worldwide. In a long-term observation of patients with NAFLD, 12.7% died of coronary artery disease (CAD) over 28 years’ follow-up. CAD is the most common cause of death in this group of patients with NAFLD[16]. Ekstedt et al[72] followed 129 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD for 13.7 years; mortality from cardiovascular causes was significantly increased compared to that of a matched reference population (15.5% vs 7.5%).

A recent epidemiological study found an increased incidence of major cardiovascular events in subjects with NAFLD independent of traditional risk factors or the aspects of metabolic syndrome[73]. One prospective study of 1637 healthy subjects found that 19% had ultrasound evidence of NAFLD. At the 5-year follow-up examination, 5.2% of the NAFLD group had experienced an adverse cardiovascular event compared with 1.0% of the non-NAFLD group. Multivariate analysis indicated that the association between NAFLD and future cardiovascular events was independent of metabolic syndrome and conventional cardiac risk factors (OR = 4.12 and 95%CI: 1.58-10.75; P = 0.004)[73].

Söderberg et al[74] found that NASH was associated with increased mortality from all causes, whereas mortality in patients with NAFLD was associated with CVD and liver-related causes over a mean of 21 years. As described above, an association of inflammatory biomarkers such as adiponectin, TNF-α, IL-6, and CRP with NASH has been demonstrated. These kinds of inflammatory markers also play an important role in CVD. Several sources of evidence suggest a connection between NAFLD and CVD including carotid artery disease, CAD, and endothelial dysfunction, all of which being more evident in patients with NAFLD.

EVIDENCE OF THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN NAFLD AND ATHEROSCLEROSIS
Carotid artery disease in NAFLD

The intima-media thickness (IMT) of the carotid artery can be measured non-invasively by ultrasound techniques. An increased IMT has been shown to be a risk factor for myocardial infarction and stroke[75]. One large study included 4222 participants found hepatic steatosis was diagnosed in 1261 participants (prevalence rate 29.9%). Individuals with fatty liver had more often carotid plaques than persons without fatty liver (plaque prevalence rate 76.8% vs 66.6%; P < 0.001)[76]. Another meta-analysis of seven cross-sectional studies confirmed that non- alcoholic fatty liver disease diagnosed on ultrasonography is strongly associated with increased carotid-artery IMT and an increased prevalence of carotid atherosclerotic plaques[77]. They suggested NAFLD patients might carry an increase of 13% of carotid IMT compared with control. Wang et al[78] study further showed that ALT level is proportionally associated with the risk of carotid IMT in subjects with fatty liver. The serum ALT level was positively associated with carotid atherosclerosis after adjustment for age, sex, number of metabolic syndrome components or status of metabolic syndrome (OR = 1.44; 95%CI: 1.09-1.89; OR = 1.45; 95%CI: 1.11-1.91). NAFLD patients had a markedly greater carotid IMT (1.14 ± 0.20 mm vs 0.82 ± 0.12 mm; P < 0.001) than control subjects. Furthermore, the severity of liver histopathology among NAFLD patients is strongly associated with early carotid atherosclerosis, independent of age, sex, BMI, smoking, LDL cholesterol, insulin resistance, and the presence of metabolic syndrome[79].

Coronary artery disease in NAFLD

Since coronary artery calcification is a common finding in patients with myocardial ischemia, multi-detector row CT (MDCT) has become a more useful modality for evaluating coronary heart disease. Atherosclerosis can now be assessed and quantified according to the extent of coronary artery calcification in terms of the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score. Higher CAC scores are seen in most patients with either symptomatic or silent myocardial ischemia. The CAC score derived from MDCT also predicts further cardiovascular events. After multivariable adjustment for clinical variables and lifestyles, Lee et al[80] showed that the existence of moderate to severe NAFLD under ultrasound examination was independently associated with an abnormal CAC score.

Chen et al[81] investigated 295 consecutive asymptomatic subjects and found that NAFLD (OR = 2.462; 95%CI: 1.065-5.691) was an independent factor that increased the risk of a > 100 CAC score in binary logistic regression. The prevalence of NAFLD also increased with CAC score severity (≤ 100, 38.1%; 101-400, 58.3%; > 400, 64.3%; P = 0.03).

When MDCT coronary angiography was used to detect CAD defined as > 50% stenosis in at least one major coronary artery, patients with NAFLD showed a higher prevalence of calcified and non-calcified coronary plaques (67% vs 34% and 52% vs 29%, respectively; both P < 0.001). NAFLD was also proved to be a strong predictor of coronary atherosclerosis (OR = 2.0; P < 0.04)[82]. Similar findings were seen in a prospective cohort study[83]. Like the relationship between NAFLD and carotid atherosclerosis, NAFLD is strongly associated with CAD independent of the presence of metabolic syndrome.

Endothelial dysfunction in NAFLD

The arterial endothelium is a target for the atherosclerotic process. Atherosclerosis is associated with endothelial dysfunction in the very early stages of the disease[84]. Endothelial function is usually measured by the continual assessment of end-diastolic brachial artery diameters before and after a short period of forearm ischemia. Villanova et al[85] found that NAFLD was inversely correlated with brachial flow-mediated vasodilation independent of components of the metabolic syndrome. In clinical practice, the limitations of this test include its lack of a proper cut-off level between normal and abnormal test results and that variability in vasodilation can be attributed to an inconsistent endothelial response. However, the results of cardiovascular risk profile tools such as Framingham Risk Score and metabolic risk score were proven to be highly associated with the presence of NAFLD[80,86].

Possible biological mechanisms underlying CVD in NAFLD

Some articles have discussed the possible biological mechanisms of patients with NAFLD who develop CVD[14,38]. Recent studies have shown that the presence of an expanded and inflamed visceral fat mass would induce increasing inflammatory cytokines, free fatty acid secretion, and insulin resistance as well as affect the liver. Chronic inflammation would then occur in the liver tissue as evidenced by increasing inflammatory marker levels (CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, and other acute-phase proteins). These released factors not only aggravate liver disease but also promote the secretion of pro-coagulant and antifibrinolytic agents. These factors have shown a strong positive correlation with CVD and the progression of atherosclerosis[87,88]. These possible biological mechanisms were supported by the graded relationships of plasma inflammatory markers (CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α) and pro-coagulant markers with NAFLD severity as described above.

The concept of NASH as a double-hit mechanism has been well recognized[89]. The first hit, hepatosteatosis, is closely associated with lipotoxicity-induced mitochondrial abnormalities that sensitize the liver to additional pro-inflammatory injuries. The second hit includes enhanced lipid peroxidation and increased generation of reactive oxygen species[90]. Animal studies revealed that inflammasome deficiency-associated changes in the configuration of the gut microbiota are associated with exacerbated hepatosteatosis and inflammation[91]. The mechanism for this might be related to the influx of Toll-like receptor (e.g., TLR4, TLR9) agonists into the portal circulation, leading to enhanced hepatic TNF-α expression that drives the progression of NASH. This study also suggested that gut microbiota may play an important role in the progression of NAFLD and other multiple metabolic syndrome-associated abnormalities. Further studies are required to elucidate how NAFLD and NASH contribute to the development and progression of CVD.

CONCLUSION

Liver biopsy remains the gold standard diagnostic method to distinguish between patients with and without NASH. However, the invasiveness of the procedure limits its function as a tool to screen a large population’s risk of NAFLD and monitor treatment and disease progression. In this review, we found that serum ferritin level may be a good candidate biomarker for distinguishing NASH from NAFLD. CK-18 and PIIINP preliminarily had better accuracy for detecting NASH than other inflammatory markers. However, larger head to head studies are necessary to establish solid relationship.

In predictive models of NASH, the FIB-4 score showed the best diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis and spared > 50% of patients with NASH from liver biopsy. Regarding imaging study of NAFLD, the combined use of ARFI and FibroScan enhanced the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosing the liver fibrosis. The MRI-based image has remarkable progress in recent years. However, as MRI is not yet widely available because of the high procedure cost and need for expertise to interpret the results, its usefulness as a tool to screen for NAFLD is limited.

CVD has emerged as a growing public health problem and early detection of subclinical atherosclerosis is important and will be beneficial for patients. This review demonstrated a growing body of evidence supporting the association of NAFLD/NASH and the occurrence of cardiovascular events independent of traditional risk factors and metabolic syndrome. It implicates that in clinical practice, we should not only focus on the hepatic situation but also need to survey the possibility of CVD in patients with a moderate to severe degree of NAFLD/NASH.

The awareness and recognition of NAFLD is the first and most critical step toward the initiation of atherosclerosis screening in patients with NAFLD. Further well designed, large, and randomized trials of patients with histologically proven NASH are needed to validate the prognostic value of NASH for diagnosis and outcomes of CVD.

Footnotes

P- Reviewer: Laguna JC S- Editor: Ma YJ L- Editor: A E- Editor: Ma S

References
1.  Matteoni CA, Younossi ZM, Gramlich T, Boparai N, Liu YC, McCullough AJ. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a spectrum of clinical and pathological severity. Gastroenterology. 1999;116:1413-1419.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
2.  Farrell GC, Larter CZ. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: from steatosis to cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2006;43:S99-S112.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1756]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1769]  [Article Influence: 98.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
3.  Clark JM, Brancati FL, Diehl AM. The prevalence and etiology of elevated aminotransferase levels in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:960-967.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
4.  Lazo M, Hernaez R, Eberhardt MS, Bonekamp S, Kamel I, Guallar E, Koteish A, Brancati FL, Clark JM. Prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in the United States: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178:38-45.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 619]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 591]  [Article Influence: 53.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
5.  Ruhl CE, Everhart JE. Determinants of the association of overweight with elevated serum alanine aminotransferase activity in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:71-79.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 420]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 431]  [Article Influence: 20.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Fan JG, Saibara T, Chitturi S, Kim BI, Sung JJ, Chutaputti A. What are the risk factors and settings for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in Asia-Pacific? J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;22:794-800.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 182]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 181]  [Article Influence: 10.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Farrell GC, Wong VW, Chitturi S. NAFLD in Asia--as common and important as in the West. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;10:307-318.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 312]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 327]  [Article Influence: 29.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Kojima S, Watanabe N, Numata M, Ogawa T, Matsuzaki S. Increase in the prevalence of fatty liver in Japan over the past 12 years: analysis of clinical background. J Gastroenterol. 2003;38:954-961.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 315]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 323]  [Article Influence: 16.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
9.  Park SH, Jeon WK, Kim SH, Kim HJ, Park DI, Cho YK, Sung IK, Sohn CI, Keum DK, Kim BI. Prevalence and risk factors of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease among Korean adults. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;21:138-143.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
10.  Day CP. Natural history of NAFLD: remarkably benign in the absence of cirrhosis. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:375-378.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 109]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 119]  [Article Influence: 6.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
11.  Thomas V, Harish K. Are we overestimating the risks of NASH? Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1015-106; author reply 1016-1017.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2]  [Article Influence: 0.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
12.  Kotronen A, Yki-Järvinen H. Fatty liver: a novel component of the metabolic syndrome. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2008;28:27-38.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 572]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 586]  [Article Influence: 36.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
13.  Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ounpuu S, Dans T, Avezum A, Lanas F, McQueen M, Budaj A, Pais P, Varigos J. Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004;364:937-952.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 7301]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6998]  [Article Influence: 349.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
14.  Targher G, Day CP, Bonora E. Risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1341-1350.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1326]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1361]  [Article Influence: 97.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
15.  Adams LA, Lymp JF, St Sauver J, Sanderson SO, Lindor KD, Feldstein A, Angulo P. The natural history of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a population-based cohort study. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:113-121.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Rafiq N, Bai C, Fang Y, Srishord M, McCullough A, Gramlich T, Younossi ZM. Long-term follow-up of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:234-238.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 528]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 526]  [Article Influence: 35.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
17.  Amarapurkar DN, Hashimoto E, Lesmana LA, Sollano JD, Chen PJ, Goh KL. How common is non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in the Asia-Pacific region and are there local differences? J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;22:788-793.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 271]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 286]  [Article Influence: 16.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
18.  Guha IN, Parkes J, Roderick P, Chattopadhyay D, Cross R, Harris S, Kaye P, Burt AD, Ryder SD, Aithal GP. Noninvasive markers of fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Validating the European Liver Fibrosis Panel and exploring simple markers. Hepatology. 2008;47:455-460.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 514]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 510]  [Article Influence: 31.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Shen J, Chan HL, Wong GL, Choi PC, Chan AW, Chan HY, Chim AM, Yeung DK, Chan FK, Woo J. Non-invasive diagnosis of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis by combined serum biomarkers. J Hepatol. 2012;56:1363-1370.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 164]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 165]  [Article Influence: 13.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
20.  Wong VW, Chu WC, Wong GL, Chan RS, Chim AM, Ong A, Yeung DK, Yiu KK, Chu SH, Woo J. Prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and advanced fibrosis in Hong Kong Chinese: a population study using proton-magnetic resonance spectroscopy and transient elastography. Gut. 2012;61:409-415.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 356]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 362]  [Article Influence: 30.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
21.  Fracanzani AL, Valenti L, Bugianesi E, Andreoletti M, Colli A, Vanni E, Bertelli C, Fatta E, Bignamini D, Marchesini G. Risk of severe liver disease in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with normal aminotransferase levels: a role for insulin resistance and diabetes. Hepatology. 2008;48:792-798.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 462]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 441]  [Article Influence: 27.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
22.  Papadia FS, Marinari GM, Camerini G, Murelli F, Carlini F, Stabilini C, Scopinaro N. Liver damage in severely obese patients: a clinical-biochemical-morphologic study on 1,000 liver biopsies. Obes Surg. 2004;14:952-958.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 43]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 44]  [Article Influence: 2.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
23.  Browning JD, Szczepaniak LS, Dobbins R, Nuremberg P, Horton JD, Cohen JC, Grundy SM, Hobbs HH. Prevalence of hepatic steatosis in an urban population in the United States: impact of ethnicity. Hepatology. 2004;40:1387-1395.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2633]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2593]  [Article Influence: 129.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (3)]
24.  Mofrad P, Contos MJ, Haque M, Sargeant C, Fisher RA, Luketic VA, Sterling RK, Shiffman ML, Stravitz RT, Sanyal AJ. Clinical and histologic spectrum of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease associated with normal ALT values. Hepatology. 2003;37:1286-1292.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 787]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 766]  [Article Influence: 36.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
25.  Sheth SG, Flamm SL, Gordon FD, Chopra S. AST/ALT ratio predicts cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;93:44-48.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 350]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 341]  [Article Influence: 13.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
26.  Brunt EM, Neuschwander-Tetri BA, Oliver D, Wehmeier KR, Bacon BR. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: histologic features and clinical correlations with 30 blinded biopsy specimens. Hum Pathol. 2004;35:1070-1082.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
27.  Franzini M, Fornaciari I, Fierabracci V, Elawadi HA, Bolognesi V, Maltinti S, Ricchiuti A, De Bortoli N, Marchi S, Pompella A. Accuracy of b-GGT fraction for the diagnosis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Liver Int. 2012;32:629-634.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 40]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 44]  [Article Influence: 3.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
28.  Daniel S, Ben-Menachem T, Vasudevan G, Ma CK, Blumenkehl M. Prospective evaluation of unexplained chronic liver transaminase abnormalities in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:3010-3014.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 4]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9]  [Article Influence: 0.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
29.  Skelly MM, James PD, Ryder SD. Findings on liver biopsy to investigate abnormal liver function tests in the absence of diagnostic serology. J Hepatol. 2001;35:195-199.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 219]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 190]  [Article Influence: 8.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
30.  Romeo GR, Lee J, Shoelson SE. Metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, and roles of inflammation--mechanisms and therapeutic targets. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2012;32:1771-1776.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 256]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 257]  [Article Influence: 21.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
31.  Polyzos SA, Toulis KA, Goulis DG, Zavos C, Kountouras J. Serum total adiponectin in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Metabolism. 2011;60:313-326.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 219]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 228]  [Article Influence: 17.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
32.  Gastaldelli A, Kozakova M, Højlund K, Flyvbjerg A, Favuzzi A, Mitrakou A, Balkau B. Fatty liver is associated with insulin resistance, risk of coronary heart disease, and early atherosclerosis in a large European population. Hepatology. 2009;49:1537-1544.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 258]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 258]  [Article Influence: 17.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
33.  Oruc N, Ozutemiz O, Yuce G, Akarca US, Ersoz G, Gunsar F, Batur Y. Serum procalcitonin and CRP levels in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a case control study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2009;9:16.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 29]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 40]  [Article Influence: 2.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
34.  Koruk M, Tayşi S, Savaş MC, Yilmaz O, Akçay F, Karakök M. Serum levels of acute phase proteins in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2003;14:12-17.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
35.  Pearce SG, Thosani NC, Pan JJ. Noninvasive biomarkers for the diagnosis of steatohepatitis and advanced fibrosis in NAFLD. Biomark Res. 2013;1:7.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 58]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 65]  [Article Influence: 5.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
36.  Valenti L, Dongiovanni P, Fargion S. Diagnostic and therapeutic implications of the association between ferritin level and severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:3782-3786.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 29]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35]  [Article Influence: 2.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
37.  Kowdley KV, Belt P, Wilson LA, Yeh MM, Neuschwander-Tetri BA, Chalasani N, Sanyal AJ, Nelson JE. Serum ferritin is an independent predictor of histologic severity and advanced fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2012;55:77-85.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 322]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 349]  [Article Influence: 29.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
38.  Cohen JC, Horton JD, Hobbs HH. Human fatty liver disease: old questions and new insights. Science. 2011;332:1519-1523.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1452]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1553]  [Article Influence: 119.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
39.  Feldstein AE. Novel insights into the pathophysiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Semin Liver Dis. 2010;30:391-401.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 83]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 89]  [Article Influence: 6.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
40.  Adams LA, Feldstein AE. Non-invasive diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. J Dig Dis. 2011;12:10-16.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 59]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 62]  [Article Influence: 4.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
41.  Wong VW, Hui AY, Tsang SW, Chan JL, Tse AM, Chan KF, So WY, Cheng AY, Ng WF, Wong GL. Metabolic and adipokine profile of Chinese patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1154-1161.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 146]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 150]  [Article Influence: 8.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
42.  Wieckowska A, Papouchado BG, Li Z, Lopez R, Zein NN, Feldstein AE. Increased hepatic and circulating interleukin-6 levels in human nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:1372-1379.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 395]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 422]  [Article Influence: 26.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
43.  García-Galiano D, Sánchez-Garrido MA, Espejo I, Montero JL, Costán G, Marchal T, Membrives A, Gallardo-Valverde JM, Muñoz-Castañeda JR, Arévalo E. IL-6 and IGF-1 are independent prognostic factors of liver steatosis and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in morbidly obese patients. Obes Surg. 2007;17:493-503.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 76]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 81]  [Article Influence: 4.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
44.  Feldstein AE, Gores GJ. Apoptosis in alcoholic and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Front Biosci. 2005;10:3093-3099.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 137]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 151]  [Article Influence: 7.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
45.  Grandison GA, Angulo P. Can NASH be diagnosed, graded, and staged noninvasively? Clin Liver Dis. 2012;16:567-585.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 47]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 52]  [Article Influence: 4.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
46.  Wieckowska A, McCullough AJ, Feldstein AE. Noninvasive diagnosis and monitoring of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: present and future. Hepatology. 2007;46:582-589.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 309]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 334]  [Article Influence: 19.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
47.  Feldstein AE, Wieckowska A, Lopez AR, Liu YC, Zein NN, McCullough AJ. Cytokeratin-18 fragment levels as noninvasive biomarkers for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: a multicenter validation study. Hepatology. 2009;50:1072-1078.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 498]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 484]  [Article Influence: 32.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
48.  Yilmaz Y, Dolar E, Ulukaya E, Akgoz S, Keskin M, Kiyici M, Aker S, Yilmaztepe A, Gurel S, Gulten M. Soluble forms of extracellular cytokeratin 18 may differentiate simple steatosis from nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:837-844.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
49.  Feldstein AE, Alkhouri N, De Vito R, Alisi A, Lopez R, Nobili V. Serum cytokeratin-18 fragment levels are useful biomarkers for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in children. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:1526-1531.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 92]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 87]  [Article Influence: 7.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
50.  Sakugawa H, Nakayoshi T, Kobashigawa K, Yamashiro T, Maeshiro T, Miyagi S, Shiroma J, Toyama A, Nakayoshi T, Kinjo F. Clinical usefulness of biochemical markers of liver fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:255-259.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
51.  Tanwar S, Trembling PM, Guha IN, Parkes J, Kaye P, Burt AD, Ryder SD, Aithal GP, Day CP, Rosenberg WM. Validation of terminal peptide of procollagen III for the detection and assessment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2013;57:103-111.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 87]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 89]  [Article Influence: 8.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
52.  de Carvalho SC, Muniz MT, Siqueira MD, Siqueira ER, Gomes AV, Silva KA, Bezerra LC, D’Almeida V, de Oliveira CP, Pereira LM. Plasmatic higher levels of homocysteine in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Nutr J. 2013;12:37.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 63]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 62]  [Article Influence: 5.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
53.  Wang R, Lu Q, Feng J, Yin F, Qin C, Liu B, Liu Y, Liu X. Coexistence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease with elevated alanine aminotransferase is associated with insulin resistance in young Han males. Endocrine. 2012;41:70-75.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 10]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14]  [Article Influence: 1.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
54.  Shimada M, Kawahara H, Ozaki K, Fukura M, Yano H, Tsuchishima M, Tsutsumi M, Takase S. Usefulness of a combined evaluation of the serum adiponectin level, HOMA-IR, and serum type IV collagen 7S level to predict the early stage of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:1931-1938.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
55.  Kruger FC, Daniels CR, Kidd M, Swart G, Brundyn K, van Rensburg C, Kotze M. APRI: a simple bedside marker for advanced fibrosis that can avoid liver biopsy in patients with NAFLD/NASH. S Afr Med J. 2011;101:477-480.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
56.  Yang HR, Kim HR, Kim MJ, Ko JS, Seo JK. Noninvasive parameters and hepatic fibrosis scores in children with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:1525-1530.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 65]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 67]  [Article Influence: 5.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
57.  Vallet-Pichard A, Mallet V, Nalpas B, Verkarre V, Nalpas A, Dhalluin-Venier V, Fontaine H, Pol S. FIB-4: an inexpensive and accurate marker of fibrosis in HCV infection. comparison with liver biopsy and fibrotest. Hepatology. 2007;46:32-36.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1288]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1425]  [Article Influence: 83.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
58.  Shah AG, Lydecker A, Murray K, Tetri BN, Contos MJ, Sanyal AJ. Comparison of noninvasive markers of fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:1104-1112.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 864]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 947]  [Article Influence: 63.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
59.  McPherson S, Stewart SF, Henderson E, Burt AD, Day CP. Simple non-invasive fibrosis scoring systems can reliably exclude advanced fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Gut. 2010;59:1265-1269.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
60.  Saadeh S, Younossi ZM, Remer EM, Gramlich T, Ong JP, Hurley M, Mullen KD, Cooper JN, Sheridan MJ. The utility of radiological imaging in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology. 2002;123:745-750.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1368]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1353]  [Article Influence: 61.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
61.  Friedrich-Rust M, Ong MF, Martens S, Sarrazin C, Bojunga J, Zeuzem S, Herrmann E. Performance of transient elastography for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:960-974.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1046]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1011]  [Article Influence: 63.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
62.  Sandrin L, Fourquet B, Hasquenoph JM, Yon S, Fournier C, Mal F, Christidis C, Ziol M, Poulet B, Kazemi F. Transient elastography: a new noninvasive method for assessment of hepatic fibrosis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29:1705-1713.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1967]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1813]  [Article Influence: 86.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
63.  Wong VW, Vergniol J, Wong GL, Foucher J, Chan HL, Le Bail B, Choi PC, Kowo M, Chan AW, Merrouche W. Diagnosis of fibrosis and cirrhosis using liver stiffness measurement in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2010;51:454-462.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 876]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 871]  [Article Influence: 62.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
64.  Myers RP, Pomier-Layrargues G, Kirsch R, Pollett A, Duarte-Rojo A, Wong D, Beaton M, Levstik M, Crotty P, Elkashab M. Feasibility and diagnostic performance of the FibroScan XL probe for liver stiffness measurement in overweight and obese patients. Hepatology. 2012;55:199-208.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 349]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 343]  [Article Influence: 28.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
65.  Petta S, Craxì A. Assessment by Fibroscan of fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: XL versus M probe? Hepatology. 2012;55:1309; author reply 1309-1310.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2]  [Article Influence: 0.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
66.  Sporea I, Şirli R, Popescu A, Bota S, Badea R, Lupşor M, Focşa M, Dănilă M. Is it better to use two elastographic methods for liver fibrosis assessment? World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17:3824-3829.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 19]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16]  [Article Influence: 1.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
67.  Johnson NA, Walton DW, Sachinwalla T, Thompson CH, Smith K, Ruell PA, Stannard SR, George J. Noninvasive assessment of hepatic lipid composition: Advancing understanding and management of fatty liver disorders. Hepatology. 2008;47:1513-1523.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 130]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 128]  [Article Influence: 8.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
68.  Le TA, Chen J, Changchien C, Peterson MR, Kono Y, Patton H, Cohen BL, Brenner D, Sirlin C, Loomba R. Effect of colesevelam on liver fat quantified by magnetic resonance in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: a randomized controlled trial. Hepatology. 2012;56:922-932.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 190]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 202]  [Article Influence: 16.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
69.  Mariappan YK, Glaser KJ, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography: a review. Clin Anat. 2010;23:497-511.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 482]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 374]  [Article Influence: 26.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
70.  Kim BH, Lee JM, Lee YJ, Lee KB, Suh KS, Han JK, Choi BI. MR elastography for noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis: experience from a tertiary center in Asia. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34:1110-1116.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 77]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 84]  [Article Influence: 6.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
71.  Chen J, Talwalkar JA, Yin M, Glaser KJ, Sanderson SO, Ehman RL. Early detection of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by using MR elastography. Radiology. 2011;259:749-756.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 312]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 319]  [Article Influence: 24.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
72.  Ekstedt M, Franzén LE, Mathiesen UL, Thorelius L, Holmqvist M, Bodemar G, Kechagias S. Long-term follow-up of patients with NAFLD and elevated liver enzymes. Hepatology. 2006;44:865-873.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1647]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1624]  [Article Influence: 90.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
73.  Hamaguchi M, Kojima T, Takeda N, Nagata C, Takeda J, Sarui H, Kawahito Y, Yoshida N, Suetsugu A, Kato T. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is a novel predictor of cardiovascular disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:1579-1584.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
74.  Söderberg C, Stål P, Askling J, Glaumann H, Lindberg G, Marmur J, Hultcrantz R. Decreased survival of subjects with elevated liver function tests during a 28-year follow-up. Hepatology. 2010;51:595-602.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 529]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 523]  [Article Influence: 37.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
75.  O'Leary DH, Polak JF, Kronmal RA, Manolio TA, Burke GL, Wolfson SK. Carotid-artery intima and media thickness as a risk factor for myocardial infarction and stroke in older adults. Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:14-22.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 3371]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3286]  [Article Influence: 131.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
76.  Volzke H, Robinson DM, Kleine V, Deutscher R, Hoffmann W, Ludemann J, Schminke U, Kessler C, John U. Hepatic steatosis is associated with an increased risk of carotid atherosclerosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:1848-1853.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
77.  Sookoian S, Pirola CJ. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease is strongly associated with carotid atherosclerosis: a systematic review. J Hepatol. 2008;49:600-607.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 277]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 289]  [Article Influence: 18.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
78.  Wang CC, Lin SK, Tseng YF, Hsu CS, Tseng TC, Lin HH, Wang LY, Kao JH. Elevation of serum aminotransferase activity increases risk of carotid atherosclerosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;24:1411-1416.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 39]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 40]  [Article Influence: 2.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
79.  Targher G, Bertolini L, Padovani R, Rodella S, Zoppini G, Zenari L, Cigolini M, Falezza G, Arcaro G. Relations between carotid artery wall thickness and liver histology in subjects with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:1325-1330.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 286]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 292]  [Article Influence: 16.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
80.  Lee YH, Wu YJ, Liu CC, Hou CJ, Yeh HI, Tsai CH, Shih SC, Hung CL. The severity of Fatty liver disease relating to metabolic abnormalities independently predicts coronary calcification. Radiol Res Pract. 2011;2011:586785.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 4]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9]  [Article Influence: 0.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
81.  Chen CH, Nien CK, Yang CC, Yeh YH. Association between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and coronary artery calcification. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:1752-1760.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 72]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 68]  [Article Influence: 4.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
82.  Assy N, Djibre A, Farah R, Grosovski M, Marmor A. Presence of coronary plaques in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Radiology. 2010;254:393-400.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 133]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 137]  [Article Influence: 9.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
83.  Wong VW, Wong GL, Yip GW, Lo AO, Limquiaco J, Chu WC, Chim AM, Yu CM, Yu J, Chan FK. Coronary artery disease and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Gut. 2011;60:1721-1727.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 201]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 210]  [Article Influence: 16.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
84.  Benjamin EJ, Larson MG, Keyes MJ, Mitchell GF, Vasan RS, Keaney JF, Lehman BT, Fan S, Osypiuk E, Vita JA. Clinical correlates and heritability of flow-mediated dilation in the community: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2004;109:613-619.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 450]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 450]  [Article Influence: 22.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
85.  Villanova N, Moscatiello S, Ramilli S, Bugianesi E, Magalotti D, Vanni E, Zoli M, Marchesini G. Endothelial dysfunction and cardiovascular risk profile in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2005;42:473-480.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 443]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 452]  [Article Influence: 23.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
86.  Liu CC, Hung CL, Shih SC, Ko HJ, Lu YT, Wu YJ, Cheng HY, Hu KC, Yeh HI, Chang RE. Age-related differences in the clinical presentation, associated metabolic abnormality, and estimated cardiovascular risks from nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a cross-sectional study from health evaluation center in Taiwan. Inter J Gerontol. 2010;4:184-191.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 4]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5]  [Article Influence: 0.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
87.  Ridker PM, Rifai N, Rose L, Buring JE, Cook NR. Comparison of C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in the prediction of first cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1557-1565.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2540]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2427]  [Article Influence: 110.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
88.  Cesari M, Penninx BW, Newman AB, Kritchevsky SB, Nicklas BJ, Sutton-Tyrrell K, Rubin SM, Ding J, Simonsick EM, Harris TB. Inflammatory markers and onset of cardiovascular events: results from the Health ABC study. Circulation. 2003;108:2317-2322.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 660]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 670]  [Article Influence: 31.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
89.  Day CP, James OF. Steatohepatitis: a tale of two “hits”? Gastroenterology. 1998;114:842-845.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2953]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2950]  [Article Influence: 113.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
90.  Sanyal AJ, Campbell-Sargent C, Mirshahi F, Rizzo WB, Contos MJ, Sterling RK, Luketic VA, Shiffman ML, Clore JN. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: association of insulin resistance and mitochondrial abnormalities. Gastroenterology. 2001;120:1183-1192.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1458]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1436]  [Article Influence: 62.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
91.  Henao-Mejia J, Elinav E, Jin C, Hao L, Mehal WZ, Strowig T, Thaiss CA, Kau AL, Eisenbarth SC, Jurczak MJ. Inflammasome-mediated dysbiosis regulates progression of NAFLD and obesity. Nature. 2012;482:179-185.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1620]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1727]  [Article Influence: 143.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]