甘油三酯葡萄糖-体重指数与新发代谢相关脂肪性肝病的关联性分析

向小红 ,  李洋 ,  李波 ,  魏嵋 ,  周仲芳 ,  黄素琼

临床肝胆病杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (4) : 840 -847.

PDF (1284KB)
临床肝胆病杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (4) : 840 -847. DOI: 10.12449/JCH260412
脂肪性肝病

甘油三酯葡萄糖-体重指数与新发代谢相关脂肪性肝病的关联性分析

作者信息 +

Association between triglyceride glucose-body mass index and new-onset metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease

Author information +
文章历史 +
PDF (1313K)

摘要

目的 探讨血清空腹甘油三酯葡萄糖-体重指数(TyG-BMI)轨迹与10年内新发代谢相关脂肪性肝病(MAFLD)的关联性。 方法 回顾性收集2013、2018和2023年于西南医科大学附属中医医院体检且2013年未患MAFLD的体检者数据,根据纳入与排除标准,纳入有效研究对象1 340例。采用R 4.3.0软件中gbmt包构建TyG-BMI动态变化轨迹模型,确定4个不同的TyG-BMI轨迹组:低水平组(n=352)、中水平组(n=517)、高水平组(n=314)和极高水平组(n=157)。收集研究对象一般资料及血液生化指标检查结果,并进行组间比较。计数资料组间比较采用χ2检验;不符合正态分布且方差不齐的计量资料多组间比较采用Kruskal-Wallis H秩和检验。采用Cox回归分析不同TyG-BMI轨迹组与MAFLD发生风险之间的关系,并使用受试者操作特征曲线(ROC曲线)评估TyG-BMI对MAFLD的诊断价值。 结果 MAFLD的累积发病率随TyG-BMI轨迹水平的升高而增加,低、中、高和极高水平组的MAFLD累积发病率分别为4.83%、29.98%、61.15%和83.44%,且男性高于女性(51.34% vs 20.67%),差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.001)。多因素Cox回归分析显示,TyG-BMI轨迹水平、尿酸、舒张压、血红蛋白和丙氨酸氨基转移酶增高均是MAFLD发病的独立危险因素(P值均<0.05),高密度脂蛋白胆固醇增高是MAFLD的独立保护因素(P<0.001)。校正混杂因素后,中水平组、高水平组和极高水平组的风险比分别为4.430[95%置信区间(CI):2.660~7.377,P<0.001]、6.937(95%CI:4.110~11.708,P<0.001)和7.989(95%CI:4.616~13.827,P<0.001)。ROC曲线分析结果显示,TyG-BMI的诊断价值最高,ROC曲线下面积值为0.859(95%CI:0.840~0.879),敏感度为79.8%,特异度为76.3%。 结论 MAFLD的发病风险随着TyG-BMI轨迹水平的升高而增加,TyG-BMI可作为MAFLD的预测指标。

Abstract

Objective To investigate the association between serum fasting triglyceride glucose-body mass index (TyG-BMI) and new-onset metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) within 10 years. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed for the data of individuals who underwent physical examination in The Affiliated Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Southwest Medical University in 2013, 2018, and 2023 and were not diagnosed with MAFLD in 2013, and a total of 1 340 valid subjects were enrolled according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The gbmt package in R 4.3.0 was used to construct the dynamic change trajectory model of TyG-BMI, and four different TyG-BMI trajectory groups were determined, i.e., the low-level group (n=352), the medium-level group (n=517), the high-level group (n=314), and the extremely high-level group (n=157). The data on general information and blood biochemical parameters were collected from all subjects and were then compared between groups. The chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for comparison of non-normally distributed continuous data with heterogeneity of variance between multiple groups. The Cox regression analysis was used to investigate the association between different TyG-BMI trajectories and the risk of MAFLD, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to assess the value of TyG-BMI in the diagnosis of MAFLD. Results The cumulative incidence rate of MAFLD increased with the increase in the level of TyG-BMI trajectory, with a cumulative incidence rate of 4.83% in the low-level group, 29.98% in the medium-level group, 61.15% in the high-level group, and 83.44% in the extremely high-level group (P<0.001), and the cumulative incidence rate of MAFLD in men was significantly higher than that in women (51.34% vs 20.67%, P<0.001). The multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that increases in the levels of TyG-BMI trajectory, uric acid, diastolic blood pressure, hemoglobin, and alanine aminotransferase were independent risk factors for the onset of MAFLD (all P<0.05), while the increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was an independent protective factor against MAFLD (P<0.001). After adjustment for confounding factors, the medium-, high-, and extremely high-level groups had a hazard ratio of 4.430 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.660 — 7.377, P<0.001), 6.937 (95%CI: 4.110 — 11.708, P<0.001), and 7.989 (95%CI: 4.616 — 13.827, P<0.001), respectively. The ROC curve analysis showed that TyG-BMI had the highest diagnostic value, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.859 (95%CI: 0.840 — 0.879), a sensitivity of 79.8%, and a specificity of 76.3%. Conclusion The risk of MAFLD increases with the increase in the level of TyG-BMI trajectory, and TyG-BMI can be used as a predictive indicator for MAFLD.

Graphical abstract

关键词

代谢相关脂肪性肝病 / 甘油三酯葡萄糖-体重指数 / 危险因素

Key words

Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Fatty Liver Disease / Triglyceride Glucose-Body Mass Index / Risk Factors

引用本文

引用格式 ▾
向小红,李洋,李波,魏嵋,周仲芳,黄素琼. 甘油三酯葡萄糖-体重指数与新发代谢相关脂肪性肝病的关联性分析[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2026, 42(4): 840-847 DOI:10.12449/JCH260412

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

非酒精性脂肪性肝病是全球最常见的慢性肝病,影响着全球约25%的人口,已成为重要的公共卫生问题1。我国570万份体检数据显示肝脂肪变的检出率为44.4%2。2020年,国际脂肪肝专家小组建议将非酒精性脂肪性肝病更名为代谢相关脂肪性肝病(metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease,MAFLD)3-4。胰岛素抵抗(insulin resistance,IR)与MAFLD的发生发展密切相关,是肝脏脂肪过度堆积的主要驱动因素,并在脂肪变性中发挥关键作用5。目前,尚无针对MAFLD的获批药物或治疗方法,多数干预措施倾向于饮食调整和生活方式改善6。此外,MAFLD还会加重心血管疾病、糖尿病及其他病症,导致不良预后7。因此,亟需寻找便捷的健康监测替代方法,以帮助早期识别MAFLD高危人群。
甘油三酯葡萄糖指数(triglyceride glucose index,TyG)是一项新兴指数,计算简单、方便。研究显示,TyG及其相关指数,包括甘油三酯葡萄糖-体重指数(triglyceride glucose-body mass index,TyG-BMI)、甘油三酯葡萄糖-腰围指数(triglyceride glucose-waist circumference index,TyG-WC),均与IR密切相关8。与抗胰岛素性稳态模式评估法相比,TyG与脂质代谢的相关性更强,对代谢相关疾病的发病具有更好的预测价值9。既往研究报道了TyG及相关指标与MAFLD患病率之间的关系,但缺乏对MAFLD的预测性研究。因此,本研究建立了TyG-BMI动态变化轨迹模型并进行分组,通过对非MAFLD人群进行10年的随访观察,旨在研究TyG-BMI动态轨迹对新发MAFLD的影响,并评估TyG-BMI水平对MAFLD的诊断价值。

1 资料与方法

1.1 研究对象

回顾性收集2013、2018和2023年于西南医科大学附属中医医院进行健康体检人员的相关资料。纳入标准:(1)年龄18~60岁;(2)2013年经腹部彩超检查明确无脂肪肝;(3)数据资料完整。排除标准:(1)患有病毒性肝炎;(2)合并恶性肿瘤或自身免疫性疾病;(3)存在严重肝肾功能障碍;(4)正在服用降脂药、降糖药;(5)过量饮酒者,男性每周乙醇摄入量>210 g,女性>140 g。按照纳入与排除标准进行筛选,最终纳入1 340例研究对象,其中男性711例、女性629例。

1.2 数据收集

1.2.1 一般资料

收集健康问卷信息、血压、身高、体重、腰围,并计算体重指数(body mass index,BMI)。血压测量:体检者坐位休息15 min后,使用欧姆龙医用全自动电子血压计(型号:HBP-9020)进行坐位血压测量,连续测量2次,每次间隔2 min,取2次血压平均值。身高、体重和腰围(waist circumference,WC)测量:使用身高体重仪(北京陆德瑞衡科技有限公司,型号:DK-08-C),体检者空腹穿着轻便衣服垂直站立于身高体重仪上进行测量。

1.2.2 血液生化指标收集

所有体检者均禁食至少8 h后采集空腹静脉血。血常规检测使用全自动血细胞计数仪(希森美康,型号:XN-9000),检测指标包括白细胞计数、红细胞计数、血红蛋白及血小板计数;肝肾功能及血脂检测使用全自动生化分析仪(贝克曼,型号:AU58P00流水型),检测指标包括血肌酐、尿素、尿酸、空腹血糖、总蛋白、白蛋白、总胆红素、直接胆红素、天冬氨酸氨基转移酶(aspartic transaminase,AST)、丙氨酸氨基转移酶(alanine transaminase,ALT)、总胆固醇(total cholesterol,TC)、甘油三酯(triacylglycerol,TG)、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(high-density lipoprotein cholesterol,HDL-C)和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(low-density lipoprotein cholesterol,LDL-C),并计算TyG、TyG-BMI和TyG-WC。计算公式如下:TyG=ln[空腹血糖(mg/dL)×空腹TG(mg/dL)]/2;TyG-BMI=ln[空腹血糖(mg/dL)×空腹TG(mg/dL)]/2×BMI;TyG-WC=ln[空腹血糖(mg/dL)×空腹TG(mg/dL)]/2×WC。单位换算:1 mg/dL=1 mmol/L×18.02。

1.2.3 MAFLD的诊断

参照《代谢相关(非酒精性)脂肪性肝病防治指南(2024年版)》10,即经超声诊断存在肝脂肪变性,并满足以下至少1项条件:(1)超重或肥胖;(2)动脉血压增高或高血压;(3)血液TG增高或高密度脂蛋白降低;(4)处于糖尿病前期或诊断为2型糖尿病。由1名中级及以上职称的超声医生使用全数字彩色超声诊断系统(无锡祥生医疗科技股份有限公司,型号:XBit70)进行超声检查。

1.3 分组

采用R 4.3.0软件中gbmt包建立动态TyG-BMI轨迹模型并进行分组。根据贝叶斯信息准则绝对值最小原则确定待选的TyG-BMI轨迹组数,并结合正确分类优势>5、各轨迹组平均后验概率>0.7及各组的人数比例≥5%,进一步确定TyG-BMI轨迹组数与最优模型。最终将研究对象划分为4个TyG-BMI分组:低水平组(n=352)、中水平组(n=517)、高水平组(n=314)和极高水平组(n=157)(图1)。

1.4 统计学方法

使用SPSS 27.0软件进行数据统计分析。计数资料以例(%)表示,多组间比较采用χ2检验;不符合正态分布且方差不齐的计量资料以MP25P75)表示,多组间比较采用Kruskal-Wallis H秩和检验。采用Cox回归分析不同TyG-BMI轨迹组与MAFLD发生风险之间的关系,并使用受试者操作特征曲线(receiver operator characteristic curve,ROC曲线)评估TyG-BMI对MAFLD的诊断价值。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 MAFLD发病情况

在10年随访期间,495例研究对象发生MAFLD,累积发病率为36.94%。低水平组、中水平组、高水平组和极高水平组的MAFLD发病率分别呈递增趋势,组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)(表1)。男性累积发病率(51.34%)高于女性(20.67%),差异有统计学意义(χ2=134.755,P<0.001)。

2.2 基线情况

不同TyG-BMI轨迹组之间,男性占比、年龄、白细胞计数、红细胞计数、血红蛋白、肌酐、尿素、尿酸、空腹血糖、AST、ALT、TG、TC、LDL-C、收缩压、舒张压、BMI、WC、TyG-WC、HDL-C水平差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.001)(表2)。

2.3 单因素Cox比例风险回归分析MAFLD的影响因素

单因素分析结果显示,中水平组、高水平组和极高水平组的MAFLD发病风险为低水平组的6.208倍、12.661倍、17.277倍(P值均<0.001)。此外,男性、年龄、白细胞计数、红细胞计数、血红蛋白、尿素、肌酐、尿酸、空腹血糖、收缩压、舒张压、WC、BMI、TG、TC、LDL-C、AST、ALT、TyG和TyG-WC均是MAFLD发病的独立危险因素(P值均<0.001),HDL-C是MAFLD的独立保护因素(P<0.001)(表3)。

2.4 多因素Cox比例风险回归分析MAFLD的影响因素

多因素分析显示,与低水平组相比,中水平组、高水平组和极高水平组发生MAFLD的风险逐渐增高(P值均<0.05);此外,尿酸增高、舒张压增高、血红蛋白增高和ALT增高均是MAFLD发病的危险因素(P值均<0.05),HDL-C升高是MAFLD的独立保护因素(P<0.001)(表4)。

2.5 TyG-BMI及相关指标诊断MAFLD的ROC曲线分析

在纳入的5项指标中,TyG-BMI诊断MAFLD的ROC曲线下面积(area under the curve, AUC)最大(AUC=0.859),敏感度为79.8%,特异度为76.3%,最佳临界值为209.220,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)(表5图2)。

3 讨论

肥胖已被广泛确认为MAFLD的危险因素11-12。近期队列研究显示,MAFLD在普通人群中的患病率为25%,而在肥胖和糖尿病患者群体中则高达50%~60%,预计至2030年该病的患病率将持续增加13。中国香港地区的一项研究显示,非肥胖者MAFLD的患病率为19.3%,肥胖者为60.5%4。人体测量指数包括BMI、WC,可作为肥胖评估有价值的筛查工具14,TyG是评估胰岛素敏感性的有效评估工具,已被广泛用于反映IR,且与MAFLD等代谢疾病密切相关15-16。然而,现有研究多呈现单次TyG-BMI的结果,鉴于TyG、BMI在生命活动过程中呈动态变化,需要进一步验证TyG-BMI的长期变化是否对MAFLD产生影响。本研究将TyG与BMI、WC联合,主要评估不同TyG-BMI轨迹对10年内MAFLD发生的影响及TyG-BMI、TyG-WC等相关指标对MAFLD的诊断效能。

脂肪肝在年轻群体中的发病率日益上升,60岁以下人群的脂肪肝年发病率为4.7%17。本研究结果显示,10年MAFLD累积发病率为36.94%,高于国内一项为期2年的轨迹研究报道的19.31%18,可能与本研究的随访时间更长有关。不同TyG-BMI分组的临床指标显示,随着TyG-BMI水平的升高,空腹血糖、TC、TG、LDL-C、血压、BMI、WC等指标水平逐渐增高,HDL-C则逐渐降低,符合IR常伴发血脂异常的临床特征19。进一步分析显示,TyG-BMI轨迹水平、血尿酸、舒张压、ALT和血红蛋白增高是MAFLD患病的独立危险因素,HDL-C增高则是独立保护因素,与其他研究结果基本一致1820

在一项随访6年的队列研究中,随着BMI轨迹升高,MAFLD的发病率随之增加,提示BMI长期高水平是MAFLD发病的独立危险因素21,WC、BMI对MAFLD的患病具有较高预测价值22。然而,考虑到MAFLD的发病机制涉及IR、脂代谢紊乱,既往研究表明TyG是MAFLD可靠的预测指标,可以作为早期干预和诊断MAFLD的潜在筛查指标,能够指导早期干预控制MAFLD的进程8。TyG-WC、TyG-BMI分别由TG、空腹血糖、WC和BMI组合生成,综合了人体测量指数和IR指标。研究表明,TyG-WC在预测IR方面优于TyG23;但在另外一项针对糖尿病前期风险的研究中,TyG-BMI识别IR的能力优于其他IR替代标志物24。国外一项研究评估了15种常用非侵入性肥胖和脂质相关指标预测普通人群MAFLD风险的能力,结果显示TyG及其相关参数(TyG-BMI、TyG-WC)可能是普通人群MAFLD风险筛查指标的最佳选择25。在本研究中,多因素Cox回归校正混杂因素后结果显示,TyG-BMI中水平组、高水平组和极高水平组发生MAFLD的风险逐渐增高,极高水平组发生MAFLD的风险比达7.989(95%置信区间: 4.616~13.827)。

在国内一项大型研究25及美国945例非糖尿病个体的队列中26,TyG-BMI对MAFLD表现出良好的预测性能,在所有评估指数中实现最大AUC。深圳一项14 280例的横断面研究显示,TyG-BMI在预测MAFLD风险方面优于传统指标27。本研究中,TyG-BMI预测MAFLD的AUC值为0.859(95%置信区间:0.840~0.879),优于TyG-WC、WC和BMI。值得注意的是,TyG-BMI和TyG-WC亦适合预测晚期肝纤维化患者的全因死亡率,且与MAFLD患者的全因死亡率、心血管死亡率和糖尿病死亡率密切相关28,值得进一步研究。

我国人口基数大,MAFLD诊断和随访工具的应用仍存在一定局限。TyG及其相关参数,可能是普通人群MAFLD风险筛查的最佳选择29。本研究首次探讨了TyG-BMI轨迹与MAFLD 10年发病风险的关系,为早期识别和干预MAFLD提供了参考。然而,本研究亦存在一定局限性。首先,对MAFLD的诊断基于腹部超声,而诊断金标准是肝脏活组织检查,可能存在轻度肝脂肪变性的漏诊,但针对体检人群进行肝脏活组织检查违背医学伦理。其次,研究周期较长,样本量偏小,未来可开展多中心基于TyG-BMI动态变化对MAFLD的诊断效能和药物治疗的研究。

参考文献

[1]

GUO XY, YIN XZ, LIU ZJ, et al. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) pathogenesis and natural products for prevention and treatment[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2022, 23(24): 15489. DOI: 10.3390/ijms232415489 .

[2]

HUANG WS. The prevalence of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease in Asia[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2025, 41(9): 1721-1724. DOI: 10.12449/JCH250901 .

[3]

黄炜燊. 亚洲地区代谢相关脂肪性肝病流行情况[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2025, 41(9): 1721-1724. DOI: 10.12449/JCH250901 .

[4]

ESLAM M, SANYAL AJ, GEORGE J. MAFLD: A consensus-driven proposed nomenclature for metabolic associated fatty liver disease[J]. Gastroenterology, 2020, 158(7): 1999-2014. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.11.312 .

[5]

ESLAM M, FAN JG, YU ML, et al. The Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease[J]. Hepatol Int, 2025, 19(2): 261-301. DOI: 10.1007/s12072-024-10774-3 .

[6]

TANASE DM, GOSAV EM, COSTEA CF, et al. The intricate relationship between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), insulin resistance (IR), and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)[J]. J Diabetes Res, 2020, 2020: 3920196. DOI: 10.1155/2020/3920196 .

[7]

YANG B, ZHANG R. Progress on the treatment of metabolic associated fatty liver disease[J/OL]. Chin J Liver Dis (Electronic Version), 2024, 16(4): 25-30. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7380.2024.04.004 .

[8]

杨彬, 张瑞. 代谢相关脂肪性肝病治疗进展[J/OL]. 中国肝脏病杂志(电子版), 2024, 16(4): 25-30. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7380.2024.04.004 .

[9]

FERGUSON D, FINCK BN. Emerging therapeutic approaches for the treatment of NAFLD and type 2 diabetes mellitus[J]. Nat Rev Endocrinol, 2021, 17(8): 484-495. DOI: 10.1038/s41574-021-00507-z .

[10]

XUE Y, XU JH, LI M, et al. Potential screening indicators for early diagnosis of NAFLD/MAFLD and liver fibrosis: Triglyceride glucose index-related parameters[J]. Front Endocrinol, 2022, 13: 951689. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.951689 .

[11]

MIN Y, WEI XY, WEI ZG, et al. Prognostic effect of triglyceride glucose-related parameters on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the United States adults with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease[J]. Cardiovasc Diabetol, 2024, 23(1): 188. DOI: 10.1186/s12933-024-02287-y .

[12]

Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for the prevention and treatment of metabolic dysfunction-associated (non-alcoholic) fatty liver disease (version 2024)[J]. J Pract Hepatol, 2024, 27(4): 494-510. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20240327-00163 .

[13]

中华医学会肝病学分会. 代谢相关(非酒精性)脂肪性肝病防治指南(2024年版)[J]. 实用肝脏病杂志, 2024, 27(4): 494-510. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20240327-00163 .

[14]

LEI RY, XUE BD, TIAN XY, et al. The association between endocrine disrupting chemicals and MAFLD: Evidence from NHANES survey[J]. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 2023, 256: 114836. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2023.114836 .

[15]

CHEN N, GENG N, LI J. Mechanisms and clinical practice advances in weight reduction for patients with metabolic associated fatty liver disease[J/OL]. Chin J Liver Dis (Electronic Version), 2025, 17(3): 10-16. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7380.2025.03.002 .

[16]

陈楠, 耿楠, 李婕. 代谢相关脂肪性肝病患者减重治疗机制与临床实践进展[J/OL]. 中国肝脏病杂志(电子版), 2025, 17(3): 10-16. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7380.2025.03.002 .

[17]

PETTA S, DI MARCO V, PIPITONE RM, et al. Prevalence and severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by transient elastography: Genetic and metabolic risk factors in a general population[J]. Liver Int, 2018, 38(11): 2060-2068. DOI: 10.1111/liv.13743 .

[18]

RUBINO F, CUMMINGS DE, ECKEL RH, et al. Definition and diagnostic criteria of clinical obesity[J]. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2025,13(3): 221-262. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00316-4 .

[19]

ER LK, WU S, CHOU HH, et al. Triglyceride glucose-body mass index is a simple and clinically useful surrogate marker for insulin resistance in nondiabetic individuals[J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(3): e0149731. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149731 .

[20]

TAO LC, XU JN, WANG TT, et al. Triglyceride-glucose index as a marker in cardiovascular diseases: Landscape and limitations[J]. Cardiovasc Diabetol, 2022, 21(1): 68. DOI: 10.1186/s12933-022-01511-x .

[21]

ZHOU JH, ZHOU F, WANG WX, et al. Epidemiological features of NAFLD from 1999 to 2018 in China[J]. Hepatology, 2020, 71(5): 1851-1864. DOI: 10.1002/hep.31150 .

[22]

QIN Q, ZHANG T, YAN S, et al. The reliation between trajectory of triglyceride glucose index combined with body mass index and new-onset non-alcoholic fatty liver disease[J]. Chin Health Manag, 2023, 17(12): 909-915. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115624-20230720-00020 .

[23]

秦迁, 张滔, 闫肃, . 甘油三酯葡萄糖指数联合体重指数的轨迹与新发非酒精性脂肪性肝病的相关性[J]. 中华健康管理学杂志, 2023, 17(12): 909-915. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115624-20230720-00020 .

[24]

TONG C, LI Q, KONG L, et al. Sex-specific metabolic risk factors and their trajectories towards the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease incidence[J]. J Endocrinol Invest, 2022, 45(12): 2233-2245. DOI: 10.1007/s40618-022-01848-w .

[25]

CHEN Q, YANG LY, ZHANG JX, et al. Correlation of non-alcoholic fatty liver with blood lipids and blood routine indicators[J]. Int Med Health Guid News, 2019, 25(11): 1810-1813. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2019.11.040 .

[26]

陈群, 杨柳茵, 张建兴, . 非酒精性脂肪肝与血脂及血常规指标的相关性[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2019, 25(11): 1810-1813. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2019.11.040 .

[27]

WANG S, ZHANG J, ZHANG J, et al. A cohort study on the correlation between body mass index trajectories and new-onset non-alcoholic fatty liver disease[J]. Chin J Hepatol, 2020, 28(7): 597-602. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20190629-00230 .

[28]

王珊, 张健, 张杰, . 体质量指数轨迹与新发非酒精性脂肪性肝病相关性的队列研究[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志, 2020, 28(7): 597-602. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20190629-00230 .

[29]

WANG LN, GAO PF, CAO F, et al. Analysis of the prevalence and influencing factors of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in different gender groups[J]. Chin Gen Pract, 2023, 26(33): 4143-4151. DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0107 .

[30]

王丽娜, 高鹏飞, 曹帆, . 不同性别人群非酒精性脂肪性肝病患病现况及影响因素分析[J]. 中国全科医学, 2023, 26(33): 4143-4151. DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0107 .

[31]

LI YW, SHAN LL, WEN Q, et al. Triglyceride glucose-waist circumference as a useful predictor for diabetes mellitus: A secondary retrospective analysis utilizing a Japanese cohort study[J]. BMC Endocr Disord, 2025, 25(1): 17. DOI: 10.1186/s12902-025-01834-2 .

[32]

JIANG CY, YANG RJ, KUANG MB, et al. Triglyceride glucose-body mass index in identifying high-risk groups of pre-diabetes[J]. Lipds Health Dis, 2021, 20(1): 161. DOI: 10.1186/s12944-021-01594-7 .

[33]

SHENG GT, LU S, XIE QY, et al. The usefulness of obesity and lipid-related indices to predict the presence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease[J]. Lipids Health Dis, 2021, 20(1): 134. DOI: 10.1186/s12944-021-01561-2 .

[34]

ZHANG Q, LIU ZL, ZHANG JQ, et al. Association between TyG related parameters and metabolic dysfunction associated fatty liver disease among nondiabetic individuals[J]. Sci Rep, 2025, 15(1): 4566. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-84917-9 .

[35]

HU HF, HAN Y, CAO CC, et al. The triglyceride glucose-body mass index: A non-invasive index that identifies non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in the general Japanese population[J]. J Transl Med, 2022, 20(1): 398. DOI: 10.1186/s12967-022-03611-4 .

[36]

CHEN QL, HU PP, HOU XX, et al. Association between triglyceride-glucose related indices and mortality among individuals with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease or metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease[J]. Cardiovasc Diabetol, 2024, 23(1): 232. DOI: 10.1186/s12933-024-02343-7 .

[37]

SON DH, LEE HS, LEE YJ, et al. Comparison of triglyceride-glucose index and HOMA-IR for predicting prevalence and incidence of metabolic syndrome[J]. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis, 2022, 32(3): 596-604. DOI: 10.1016/j.numecd.2021.11.017 .

基金资助

泸州市人民政府-西南医科大学联合项目(2023LZXNYDj027)

西南医科大学-西南医科大学附属中医医院联合项目(2020XYLH-071)

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (1284KB)

0

访问

0

被引

详细

导航
相关文章

AI思维导图

/