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 28;10(4):595-599.
doi: 10.14218/JCTH.2021.00379. Epub 2022 Jan 7.

Sex-specific Cutoff Values of Visceral Fat Area for Lean vs. Overweight/Obese Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Asians

Affiliations

Sex-specific Cutoff Values of Visceral Fat Area for Lean vs. Overweight/Obese Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Asians

Sunyoung Lee et al. J Clin Transl Hepatol. .

Abstract

Background and aims: Visceral obesity is a risk factor for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We investigated sex-specific optimal cutoff values for visceral fat area (VFA) associated with lean and overweight/obese NAFLD in an Asian population.

Methods: This retrospective study included 678 potential living liver donors (mean age, 30.8±9.4 years; 434 men and 244 women) who had undergone abdominal computed tomography (CT) imaging and liver biopsy between November 2016 and October 2017. VFA was measured using single-slice abdominal CT. NAFLD was evaluated by liver biopsy (≥5% hepatic steatosis). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine cutoff values for VFA associated with lean (body mass index [BMI] <23 kg/m2) and overweight/obese (BMI ≥23 kg/m2) NAFLD.

Results: Area under the curve (AUC) values with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for VFA were 0.82 (95% CI, 0.75-0.88) for lean and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69-0.79) for overweight/obese men with NAFLD. The AUC values were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.58-0.75) for lean and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62-0.80) for overweight/obese women with NAFLD. The cutoff values for VFA associated with lean NAFLD were 50.2 cm2 in men and 40.5 cm2 in women. The optimal cutoff values for VFA associated with overweight/obese NAFLD were 100.6 cm2 in men and 68.0 cm2 in women.

Conclusions: Sex-specific cutoff values for VFA may be useful for identifying subjects at risk of lean and overweight/obese NAFLD.

Keywords: Adipose tissue; Computed tomography.; Hepatic steatosis; Liver biopsy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflict of interests related to this publication.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Receiver operating characteristic curves for visceral fat area to identify (A) lean nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in men, (B) in lean women, (C) in overweight/obese men, and (D) overweight/obese in women.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-Meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016;64(1):73–84. doi: 10.1002/hep.28431. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, Charlton M, Cusi K, Rinella M, 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. Kumar R, Mohan S. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in lean subjects: Characteristics and implications. J Clin Transl Hepatol. 2017;5(3):216–223. doi: 10.14218/JCTH.2016.00068. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ye Q, Zou B, Yeo YH, Li J, Huang DQ, Wu Y, et al. Global prevalence, incidence, and outcomes of non-obese or lean non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;5(8):739–752. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30077-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Feldman A, Eder SK, Felder TK, Kedenko L, Paulweber B, Stadlmayr A, et al. Clinical and metabolic characterization of lean caucasian subjects with non-alcoholic fatty liver. Am J Gastroenterol. 2017;112(1):102–110. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2016.318. - DOI - PubMed