Title:Hepatologists’ Awareness and Knowledge of NAFLD and the Familiarity
with Renaming NAFLD to MAFLD
Volume: 24
Issue: 12
Author(s): Shereen Abdel Alem, Yasser Fouad, Mohamed AbdAllah, Dina Attia, Inas Kamal, Ebada Said, Ahmed Gomaa, Sherief M. Abd-Elsalam*Yasmine Gaber*
Affiliation:
- Department of Tropical Medicine, Faculty of
Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
- Department of Endemic Medicine and Hepatology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Keywords:
Awareness, FLD awareness, metabolic-associated fatty liver disease, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, liver, hepatologists, hepatic steatosis.
Abstract:
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.
