Search

Background & Aims: The shift to redefine nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as metabolic associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) can profoundly affect patient care, health care professionals, and progress within the field. To date, there remains no consensus on the characterization of NAFLD vs MAFLD. Thus, this study sought to compare the differences between the natural history of NAFLD and MAFLD., Methods: Medline and Embase databases were searched to include articles on prevalence, risk factors, or outcomes of patients with MAFLD or NAFLD. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using the generalized linear mix model. Risk factors and outcomes were evaluated in conventional pairwise meta-analysis., Results: Twenty-two articles involving 379,801 patients were included. Pooled prevalence of MAFLD was 39.22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.96%-48.15%) with the highest prevalence in Europe and Asia, followed by North America. The current MAFLD Definition only accounted for 81.59% (95% CI, 66.51%-90.82%) of NAFLD diagnoses. Patients had increased odds of being diagnosed with MAFLD compared with NAFLD (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.16-1.63; P < .001). Imaging modality resulted in a significantly higher odds of being diagnosed with MAFLD compared with NAFLD, but not biopsy. MAFLD was significantly associated with males, higher body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, lipids, transaminitis, and greater fibrosis scores compared with NAFLD., Conclusions: There were stark differences in the prevalence and risk factors between MAFLD and NAFLD. However, in the use of the MAFLD Definition, a greater emphasis on the management of concomitant metabolic diseases and a collaborative effort is required to explore the complex pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying the disease., (Copyright © 2023 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has shown to be effective in management of colorectal neoplasm in the Asian countries, while its implementation in Western countries where endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is preferred is still debatable., Aim: To compare the surgical, histological, and oncological outcomes between ESD and EMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps, with subgroup analysis comparing the efficacy of ESD and EMR between Japan and the rest of the world., Methods: Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to October 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for studies comparing en bloc , complete resection, margin involvement, resection time, need for additional surgery, complications, and recurrence rate of ESD with EMR., Results: Of 281344 colorectal polyps from 21 studies were included. When compared to EMR, the pooled analysis revealed ESD was associated with higher en bloc and complete resection rate, and lower lateral margin involvement and recurrence. ESD led to increased procedural time, need for additional surgery, and perforation risk. No significant difference in bleeding risk was found between the two groups. Meta-regression analysis suggested only right colonic polyps correlated with an increased perforation risk in ESD. Confounders including polyp size and invasion depth did not significantly influence the en bloc and complete resection rate, bleeding risk and recurrence. In subgroup analysis, Japan performed better than the rest of the world in both ESD and EMR with perforation risk of 4% and 0.0002%, respectively, as compared to perforation risk of 8% and 1%, respectively, in reports coming from rest of the world., Conclusion: ESD resulted in better resection outcomes and lower recurrence compared to EMR. With appropriate training, ESD is preferred over EMR as the first-line therapy for resection of colorectal polyps, without restricting to lesions greater than 20 mm and those with high suspicion of submucosal invasion., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors deny any conflict of interest., (©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)