Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Objective: To investigate current use of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy and influencing factors among coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in China. Methods: Results of this study derived from "China Atrial Fibrillation Registry Study", the study prospectively enrolled atrial fibrillation (AF) patients from 31 hospitals, and patients with valvular AF or treated with catheter ablation were excluded. Baseline data such as age, sex and type of atrial fibrillation were collected, and drug history, history of concomitant diseases, laboratory results and echocardiography results were recorded. CHA₂DS₂-VASc score and HAS-BLED score were calculated. The patients were followed up at the 3rd and 6th months after enrollment and every 6 months thereafter. Patients were divided according to whether they had coronary artery disease and whether they took OAC. Results: 11 067 NVAF patients fulfilling guideline criteria for OAC treatment were included in this study, including 1 837 patients with CAD. 95.4% of NVAF patients with CAD had CHA₂DS₂-VASc score≥2, and 59.7% of patients had HAS-BLED≥3, which was significantly higher than NVAF patients without CAD (P<0.001). Only 34.6% of NVAF patients with CAD were treated with OAC at enrollment. The proportion of HAS-BLED≥3 in the OAC group was significantly lower than in the no-OAC group (36.7% vs. 71.8%, P<0.001). After adjustment with multivariable logistic regression analysis, thromboembolism(OR=2.48,95%CI 1.50-4.10,P<0.001), left atrial diameter≥40 mm(OR=1.89,95%CI 1.23-2.91,P=0.004), stain use (OR=1.83,95%CI 1.01-3.03, P=0.020) and β blocker use (OR=1.74,95%CI 1.13-2.68,P=0.012)were influence factors of OAC treatment. However, the influence factors of no-OAC use were female(OR=0.54,95%CI 0.34-0.86,P=0.001), HAS-BLED≥3 (OR=0.33,95%CI 0.19-0.57,P<0.001), and antiplatelet drug(OR=0.04,95%CI 0.03-0.07,P<0.001). Conclusion: The rate of OAC treatment in NVAF patients with CAD is still low and needs to be further improved. The training and assessment of medical personnel should be strengthened to improve the utilization rate of OAC in these patients.
Humans ; Female ; Male ; Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy* ; Coronary Artery Disease/complications* ; Anticoagulants/therapeutic use* ; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Risk Factors ; China ; Administration, Oral ; Stroke

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and prior stroke history have a high risk of cardiovascular events despite anticoagulation therapy. It is unclear whether catheter ablation (CA) has further benefits in these patients. METHODS: AF patients with a previous history of stroke or systemic embolism (SE) from the prospective Chinese Atrial Fibrillation Registry study between August 2011 and December 2020 were included in the analysis. Patients were matched in a 1:1 ratio to CA or medical treatment (MT) based on propensity score. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death or ischemic stroke (IS)/SE. RESULTS: During a total of 4.1 ± 2.3 years of follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 111 patients in the CA group (3.3 per 100 person-years) and in 229 patients in the MT group (5.7 per 100 person-years). The CA group had a lower risk of the primary outcome compared to the MT group [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.74, P < 0.001]. There was a significant decreasing risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.31-0.61, P < 0.001), IS/SE (HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.97, P = 0.033), cardiovascular mortality (HR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19-0.54, P < 0.001) and AF recurrence (HR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.30-0.37, P < 0.001) in the CA group compared to that in the MT group. Sensitivity analysis generated consistent results when adjusting for time-dependent usage of anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS In AF patients with a prior stroke history, CA was associated with a lower combined risk of all-cause death or IS/SE. Further clinical trials are warranted to confirm the benefits of CA in these patients.

In May 2023, the Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association published the revised clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes. We incorporated the latest clinical research findings through a comprehensive systematic literature review and applied them in a manner suitable for the Korean population. These guidelines are designed for all healthcare providers nationwide, including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators who manage patients with diabetes or individuals at risk of developing diabetes. Based on recent changes in international guidelines and the results of a Korean epidemiological study, the recommended age for diabetes screening has been lowered. In collaboration with the relevant Korean medical societies, recently revised guidelines for managing hypertension and dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes have been incorporated into this guideline. An abridgment containing practical information on patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

Background: We evaluated the prevalence and management of diabetes mellitus (DM) in elderly Korean patients based on data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). Methods: A total of 3,068 adults aged 65 years and older (19.8% of total population) were analyzed using KNHANES from 2019 to 2020. Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control rates, and comorbidities were analyzed. Lifestyle behaviors and energy intake were also measured. Results: The prevalence of DM and prediabetes was 29.6% and 50.5%, respectively. The awareness, treatment and control rates were 76.4%, 73.3%, and 28.3%, respectively. The control rate was 77.0% if A1C <7.5% criteria was used. The mean A1C value of individuals with known DM was 7.1%, and 14.5% of the known DM patients had A1C ≥8.0%. Abdominal obesity, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia were combined with DM in 63.9%, 71.7%, and 70.7%, respectively, and the rate of integrated management was 36.0% (A1C <7.5% criteria). A total of 40.1% of those with DM walked regularly. The percentage of energy intake from carbohydrates was higher in those with DM than in those without DM (P=0.044), while those of fat (P=0.003) and protein (P=0.025) were lower in those with DM than in those without DM in women. Conclusion In 2019 to 2020, three of 10 adults aged 65 years and older in Korea had DM, and approximately 70% of them had comorbidities. A strategy for more individualized comprehensive care for the elderly patients with DM is urgently needed.

Atrial Fibrillation/surgery* ; Catheter Ablation ; Humans ; Pulmonary Veins

Background Ultrasound-guided continuous thoracic paravertebral block can provide pain-relieving and opioid-sparing effects in patients receiving open hepatectomy. We hypothesize that these effects may improve the quality of recovery (QoR) after open hepatectomy. Methods Seventy-six patients undergoing open hepatectomy were randomized to receive a continuous thoracic paravertebral block with ropivacaine (CTPVB group) or normal saline (control group). All patients received patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine postoperatively for 48 hours. The primary outcome was the global Chinese 15-item Quality of Recovery score on postoperative day 7, which was statistically analyzed using Student's t-test. Results Thirty-six patients in the CTPVB group and 37 in the control group completed the study. Compared to the control group, the CTPVB group had significantly increased global Chinese 15-item Quality of Recovery scores (133.14 ± 12.97 vs. 122.62 ± 14.89, P = 0.002) on postoperative day 7. Postoperative pain scores and cumulative morphine consumption were significantly lower for up to 8 and 48 hours (P < 0.05; P = 0.002), respectively, in the CTPVB group. Conclusion Perioperative CTPVB markably promotes patient's QoR after open hepatectomy with a profound analgesic effect in the early postoperative period.
Anesthetics, Local/therapeutic use* ; Double-Blind Method ; Hepatectomy/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Morphine/therapeutic use* ; Pain Measurement ; Pain, Postoperative/etiology* ; Ultrasonography, Interventional