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.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

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.

Purpose: This study aims to explore the relationship between soy food consumption and gastric cancer (GC) risk, accounting for Helicobacter pylori infection status. Materials and Methods: We analyzed data from patients with GC and healthy individuals prospectively enrolled by 6 hospitals between 2016 and 2018. Dietary intake was evaluated using questionnaires that categorized seven dietary habits and 19 food groups. Multivariate logistic regression models were applied to examine associations. Model I adjusted for various epidemiological factors, while Model II included further adjustments for H. pylori infection.Primary exposures examined were consumption frequencies of nonfermented, unsalted soy foods (soybean/tofu) and fermented, salty soy foods (soybean paste stew). Results: A total of 5,535 participants were included, with 1,629 diagnosed with GC. In Model I, the frequency of soybean/tofu consumption was inversely related to GC risk; adjusted odd ratios (aORs) were 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48–0.8), 0.38 (95% CI, 0.3–0.49), 0.42 (95% CI, 0.33–0.53), and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.27–0.42) for 1 time/week, 2 times/week, 3 times/week, and ≥4 times/week. Consumption of 2 servings/week of soybean paste stew showed the lowest GC association, forming a V-shaped curve. Both low (aOR, 4.03; 95% CI, 3.09–5.26) and high serving frequencies of soybean paste stew (aOR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.76–2.82) were associated with GC. The association between soy foods and GC in Model II was similar to that in Model I. The soy food-GC associations were consistent across sexes in Model I.Nonetheless, the positive correlation between frequent consumption of soybean paste stew (≥5 times/week) and GC was more pronounced in women (aOR, 7.58; 95% CI, 3.20–17.99) compared to men (aOR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.61–5.88) in Model II. Subgroup analyses by H. pylori status and salty diet revealed a consistent inverse relationship between soybean/tofu and GC risk. In contrast, soybean paste stew showed a V-shaped relationship in H. pylori-positive or salty diet groups and no significant association in the H. pylori-negative group. Conclusions Soybean/tofu intake is consistently associated with a decreased risk of GC.However, the relationship between soybean paste stew consumption and GC risk varies, depending on H. pylori infection status and dietary salt intake.