Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug 3:2022:1782221.
doi: 10.1155/2022/1782221. eCollection 2022.

Insulin Resistance Markers to Detect Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in a Male Hispanic Population

Affiliations

Insulin Resistance Markers to Detect Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in a Male Hispanic Population

Maritza Pérez-Mayorga et al. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. .

Abstract

Background: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is one of the leading causes of chronic liver disease and is closely associated with cardiometabolic disorders, being insulin resistance (IR) the common pathogenic mechanism. The triglycerides/glucose (TyG) index and triglycerides/HDL-c (TG/HDL) ratio are markers correlated with IR. We compared the capacity of these two indexes, alongside IR, to detect NAFLD.

Methods: In a cross-sectional cohort study, we examined 263 active military personnel from the Colombian Air Force, aged between 29 and 54 years. Anthropometric measurements and biochemical determinations (glycemia, lipid profile, and insulin) were obtained, and ultrasound studies were performed to evaluate the presence of NAFLD. HOMA-IR index was calculated as (fasting insulin (µIU/mL) × fasting glucose (mmol/L)/22.5), the TyG index as Ln (triglycerides (mg/dL) × fasting glucose (mg/dL)/2), and the TG/HDL ratio as (triglycerides (mg/dL)/HDL-c (mg/dL)).

Results: NAFLD ultrasound criteria were met in 70 individuals (26.6%). Subjects with NAFLD had significantly higher values of HOMA-IR (2.55 ± 1.36 vs. 1.51 ± 0.91), TyG (9.17 ± 0.53 vs. 8.7 ± 0.51), and TG/HDL (6.6 ± 4.54 vs. 3.52 ± 2.32) compared to those without NAFLD (p < 0.001). A TyG cutoff point of 8.92 showed an AUC of 0.731, while cutoff points of 3.83 for TG/HDL and 1.68 for HOMA-IR showed an AUC of 0.766 and 0.781, respectively.

Conclusion: Our study shows that novel and lower-cost markers of IR are useful for detecting NALFD, with a performance comparable to the HOMA-IR index. These markers should be used as the first step when screening patients for NAFLD.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) across tertiles of insulin resistance markers (HOMA-IR, TyG, and TG/HDL).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and corresponding areas under the curve (AUC) for the diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Chalasani N., Younossi Z., Lavine J. E., et al. The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: practice guidance from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology . 2018;67(1):328–357. doi: 10.1002/hep.29367. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Younossi Z. M. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease - a global public health perspective. Journal of Hepatology . 2019;70(3):531–544. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.10.033. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Younossi Z. M., Stepanova M., Ong J., et al. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is the most rapidly increasing indication for liver transplantation in the United States. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology . 2021;19(3):580–589.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.05.064. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Asrani S. K., Devarbhavi H., Eaton J., Kamath P. S. Burden of liver diseases in the world. Journal of Hepatology . 2019;70(1):151–171. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.09.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mantovani A., Byrne C. D., Bonora E., Targher G. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and risk of incident type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care . 2018;41(2):372–382. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1902. - DOI - PubMed