Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2024
Hepatologists' Awareness and Knowledge of NAFLD and the Familiarity with Renaming NAFLD to MAFLD.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alem Shereen Abdel, Fouad Yasser, AbdAllah Mohamed, Attia Dina, Kamal Inas, Said Ebada, Gomaa Ahmed, Abd-Elsalam Sherief M, Gaber Yasmine
Аннотация
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is an emerging epidemic; it is a negative diagnosis that depends mainly on the presence of hepatic steatosis with or without inflammation after the exclusion of other chronic liver diseases and excess alcohol intake. However, the new definition of MAFLD is a shift towards a diagnosis of inclusion based on the presence of metabolic dysfunction, regardless of alcohol consumption or other concomitant liver diseases. Given the growing relevance of the disease, data on hepatologists' views and understanding of NAFLD are limited, we aimed to determine hepatologists' awareness and expertise of NAFLD screening, diagnosis, and therapeutic options as well as the influence of changing the NAFLD name to MAFLD on awareness of the fatty liver disease (FLD).
OBJECTIVE: Most of the hepatologists agreed that NAFLD can cause serious hepatic illness and may be linked to metabolic risk factors, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Hepatologists have a poor understanding of NAFLD care. The shift in terminology from NAFLD to MAFLD will be more known to hepatologists, and it may offer better awareness of FLD.
METHODS: A multicenter online questionnaire of 655 hepatologists was carried out, giving a sample of 207 respondents. A survey composed of 36 questions was used to assess the level of hepatologists' awareness and practices in the screening, diagnosis, and management of NAFLD/MAFLD, as well as their familiarity with the nomenclature change from NAFLD to MAFLD.
RESULTS: A total of 207 hepatologists were included, of which 107 (51.4%) were males, with a mean age was 36.4 years. 50.2% (n = 104) of the hepatologists were oriented with NAFLD. Only 41 (19.8%) realized that NAFLD may frequently result in severe hepatic disease. NAFLD is rarely screened by the majority of the participating hepatologists (118, 57%), and (135, 65.2%) of them use liver biopsy for diagnosis of NAFLD. In (104, 50.2%) hepatologists, changing the nomenclature of NAFLD was relatively familiar. Furthermore, 71.9% of hepatologists thought that the new nomenclature offers a better awareness of FLD.
CONCLUSION: A small percentage of hepatologists agreed that NAFLD can cause serious hepatic illness and may be linked to metabolic risk factors, and around half of them realize that NAFLD necessitates a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Hepatologists have a poor understanding of NAFLD care. The shift in terminology from NAFLD to MAFLD will be more known to hepatologists, and it may offer better awareness of FLD.
OBJECTIVE: Most of the hepatologists agreed that NAFLD can cause serious hepatic illness and may be linked to metabolic risk factors, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Hepatologists have a poor understanding of NAFLD care. The shift in terminology from NAFLD to MAFLD will be more known to hepatologists, and it may offer better awareness of FLD.
METHODS: A multicenter online questionnaire of 655 hepatologists was carried out, giving a sample of 207 respondents. A survey composed of 36 questions was used to assess the level of hepatologists' awareness and practices in the screening, diagnosis, and management of NAFLD/MAFLD, as well as their familiarity with the nomenclature change from NAFLD to MAFLD.
RESULTS: A total of 207 hepatologists were included, of which 107 (51.4%) were males, with a mean age was 36.4 years. 50.2% (n = 104) of the hepatologists were oriented with NAFLD. Only 41 (19.8%) realized that NAFLD may frequently result in severe hepatic disease. NAFLD is rarely screened by the majority of the participating hepatologists (118, 57%), and (135, 65.2%) of them use liver biopsy for diagnosis of NAFLD. In (104, 50.2%) hepatologists, changing the nomenclature of NAFLD was relatively familiar. Furthermore, 71.9% of hepatologists thought that the new nomenclature offers a better awareness of FLD.
CONCLUSION: A small percentage of hepatologists agreed that NAFLD can cause serious hepatic illness and may be linked to metabolic risk factors, and around half of them realize that NAFLD necessitates a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Hepatologists have a poor understanding of NAFLD care. The shift in terminology from NAFLD to MAFLD will be more known to hepatologists, and it may offer better awareness of FLD.