metricas
covid
Buscar en
Annals of Hepatology
Toda la web
Inicio Annals of Hepatology Retinopathy as a predictive indicator for significant hepatic fibrosis according...
Información de la revista
Vol. 29. Núm. 4.
(julio - agosto 2024)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Visitas
661
Vol. 29. Núm. 4.
(julio - agosto 2024)
Original article
Acceso a texto completo
Retinopathy as a predictive indicator for significant hepatic fibrosis according to T2DM status: A cross-sectional study based on the national health and nutrition examination survey data
Visitas
661
Jinze Lia,1, Yi Xiangb,c,d,e,1, Jiahao Hanc,d,e,1, Youfang Gaof,1, Ruiying Wangd,e,g, Zihe Dongd,e,g, Huihui Chend,e,h, Ruixia Gaod,e,i, Chuan Liuc,d,e, Gao-Jun Tengj, Xiaolong Qic,d,e,
Autor para correspondencia
qixiaolong@vip.163.com

Corresponding author.
a Institute for AI in Medicine, School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, Jiangsu Province, China
b Department of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou 341000, Jiangxi Province, China
c Center of Portal Hypertension, Department of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Medical School, Southeast University, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology (Southeast University), Nanjing 210044, Jiangsu Province, China
d Basic Medicine Research and Innovation Center of Ministry of Education, Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, Nanjing 210009, Jiangsu Province, China
e State Key Laboratory of Digital Medical Engineering, Nanjing 210044, Jiangsu Province, China
f Department of Infectious Disease, The People's Hospital of Bozhou, Bozhou 236800, Anhui Province, China
g The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu Province, China
h Department of Ultrasound, Zhongda Hospital, Medical School, Southeast University, Nanjing 210009, Jiangsu Province, China
i Medical School, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, Jiangsu Province, China
j Center of Interventional Radiology and Vascular Surgery, Department of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Medical School, Southeast University, Nanjing 210009, Jiangsu Province, China
Ver más
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Resumen
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Figuras (2)
Tablas (4)
Table 1. Comparison of baseline characteristics between T2DM and non-T2DM population
Table 2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of clinical factors affecting hepatic fibrosis grading
Table 3. Chi-square test and Pearson correlation analysis between the grades of retinopathy severity and hepatic fibrosis in the entire population
Table 4. Chi-square test and Pearson correlation analysis between the grades of retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis in T2DM population
Mostrar másMostrar menos
Abstract
Introduction and Objectives

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), a prevalent metabolic disorder, often coexists with a range of complications, with retinopathy being particularly common. Recent studies have shed light on a potential connection between diabetic retinopathy (DR) and hepatic fibrosis, indicating a possible shared pathophysiological foundation in T2DM. This study investigates the correlation between retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis among individuals with T2DM, as well as evaluates the diagnostic value of DR for significant hepatic fibrosis.

Materials and Methods

Our cross-sectional analysis incorporated 5413 participants from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2008. The Fibrosis-4 score (FIB-4) classified hepatic fibrosis into different grades (F0-F4), with significant hepatic fibrosis marked as F2 or higher. Retinopathy severity was determined using retinal imaging and categorized into four levels. The analysis of variance or Chi-square tests facilitated group comparisons. Additionally, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis appraised the predictive accuracy of retinopathy for significant hepatic fibrosis in the T2DM population.

Results

Among 5413 participants, the mean age was 59.56 ± 12.41, with 50.2% male. And 20.6% were diagnosed with T2DM. Hepatic fibrosis grading was positively associated with retinopathy severity (OR [odds ratio]: 1.521, 95%CI [confidence interval]: 1.152-2.008, P = 0.003) across the entire population. The association was amplified in the T2DM population according to Pearson's analysis results. The ROC curve demonstrated retinopathy's diagnostic capacity for significant hepatic fibrosis in the T2DM population (AUC [area under curve] = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.651-0.793, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Retinopathy could serve as an independent predictor of significant hepatic fibrosis in T2DM population. Ophthalmologists are advised to closely monitor T2DM patients with retinopathy.

Keywords:
Hepatic fibrosis
Retinopathy
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Predictive indicator
Abbreviations:
T2DM
NHANES
FIB-4
ROC
CT
MRI
NAFLD
OGTT
AST
ALT
PLT
NPR
PR
SD
IQR
BMI
SBP
DBP
FLI
Texto completo
1Introduction

Hepatic fibrosis often emerges as a frequent outcome of chronic hepatic injury and ranks among the significant long-term hepatic complications for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) [1,2]. Additionally, hepatic fibrosis, as a component of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), has a mutual and bi-directional relationship with metabolic syndrome caused by T2DM, such as impaired glucose disposal [3]. In the absence of timely and active intervention, a fraction of fibrosis can relentlessly advance due to the synergy of cofactors, leading to severe distortion of hepatic structure. This progress may eventually result in cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, potentially leading to hepatic failure and death [4–6]. Furthermore, hepatic fibrosis has been identified as a pivotal prognostic marker of liver-related morbidity and mortality [7]. Given their intertwined pathogenesis, the combined effects of hepatic fibrosis and T2DM can exacerbate hepatic disease and amplify the risk of chronic vascular complications in diabetes [8].

Early screening for hepatic fibrosis in patients with T2DM is a vital clinical consideration. Despite hepatic biopsy being recognized as the current gold standard for assessing the severity and stage of hepatic fibrosis, its inherent risks and associated high costs limit its viability as a routine screening method [9]. Non-invasive imaging evaluations, such as ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), offer alternative diagnostic approaches. However, they are not without limitations in terms of convenience and patient compliance [10,11]. Therefore, the need to explore an accessible, non-invasive, and affordable diagnostic tool to facilitate the early detection of hepatic fibrosis progression is paramount.

Retinopathy is a common microvascular complication of T2DM, resulting in the destruction of the blood-retinal barrier, pathological angiogenesis, and scar formation [12]. Given the established correlation between hepatic fibrosis and microvascular complications [13], it is plausible to hypothesize a potential link between diabetic retinopathy (DR) and hepatic fibrosis. However, this conclusion remains a point of contention [14].

In this light, this cross-sectional study leverages data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2008 to investigate the link between DR and hepatic fibrosis in the T2DM population. The study aims to employ simple, non-invasive retinopathy screening to identify T2DM individuals at risk of hepatic fibrosis, thereby providing novel insights for hepatic fibrosis screening.

2Materials and methods2.1Study population and baseline characteristics

The NHANES, a cross-sectional population-based investigation, assesses the health and nutritional status of communities across the United States [15]. Since the 1960s and continuing since 1999, NHANES surveys approximately 5,000 nationally representative individuals annually. The resultant data, amassed within the NHANES database, is publicly accessible and instrumental in guiding medical, environmental, and public health decisions.

Of the 20,497 participants from the NHANES cycles of 2005 to 2008, retinal imaging was conducted for 5,704 individuals. Based on the flow chart depicted in Fig. 1, a total of 5,413 participants were included in this study.

Fig. 1.

Flow chart. BMI, Body Mass; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; PR, Proliferative Retinopathy; NPR, Non-proliferative Retinopathy.

(0.32MB).

This study analyzes demographic (age, sex, and race/ethnicity), self-reported questionnaires (smoking and drinking), history of disease (hypertension, hyperlipemia, hepatitis B virus infection, and hepatitis C virus infection), examination (height (cm), weight (kg), body mass index (BMI, kg/m2), fasting glucose (mg/dL), systolic blood pressure (SBP, mmHg), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP, mmHg)), and laboratory data (aspartate aminotransferase (AST, U/L), alanine aminotransferase (ALT, U/L), platelet count (PLT, ×10⁹/L); Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c, %); and Fatty Liver Index (FLI) [16]).

2.2Diagnostic criteria for T2DM

T2DM was diagnosed based on specific diagnostic criteria [17], including either a random venous plasma glucose concentration ≥ 11.1 mmol/L, a fasting plasma glucose concentration ≥ 7.0 mmol/L (whole blood ≥ 6.1 mmol/L), or a two-hour plasma glucose concentration ≥ 11.1 mmol/L following a 75g anhydrous glucose oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Patients who had ever told having a physician-diagnosed diagnosis of T2DM or were currently taking insulin/diabetes pills were also diagnosed with T2DM.

2.3Severity of retinopathy

Retinopathy severity was assessed using retinal imaging and categorized into four levels according to the NHANES Grading Protocol [18]: Level 1 = no retinopathy; Level 2 = mild non-proliferative retinopathy (NPR); Level 3 = moderate or severe NPR; Level 4 = proliferative retinopathy (PR) with new vessels on the disc. DR was defined based on both diagnoses of retinopathy and T2DM.

2.4Grades of hepatic fibrosis

Hepatic fibrosis grades were determined using the Fibrosis-4 score (FIB-4). The FIB-4 has been validated in other chronic liver diseases to identify patients with significant fibrosis [19]. The FIB-4 calculation, based on age, AST, ALT, and PLT, was used to assess different hepatic fibrosis stages.

The FIB-4 calculation classifications were as follows:

FIB-4<1.45 equated to mild fibrosis (F0-F1), 1.45–3.25 to moderate fibrosis (F2), and >3.25 to advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis (F3-F4), with significant hepatic fibrosis being defined as grade F2 or higher [20].

2.5Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS software (Version 22·0) or R software (Version 3 ·3·2). Continuous variables were reported as the number of observations (n), with normally distributed data described using Mean ± Standard Deviation (SD) and non-normally distributed data characterized by the Median and Interquartile Range (IQR). Categorical variables are summarized by percentage (frequency). Significant differences between the entire population and T2DM population were estimated by chi-square test. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed on the association between clinical factors and hepatic fibrosis grading. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and Pearson correlation coefficient were harnessed to evaluate the predictive efficacy of retinopathy for significant hepatic fibrosis. P <0.05 was statistically significant.

2.6Ethical statement

The collection of human tissue samples or clinical data was not involved in this study. All data was downloaded from network open databases. The NHANES protocol is approved by the National Center for Health Statistics Research Ethics Review Board, and all participants provide written informed consent.

3Results3.1Characterization of study participants

The study cohort encompassed 5,413 individuals, with a mean age of 59.56 ± 12.41 years, and approximately half being male (50.2%). Of these, 1,117 (20.6%) individuals were diagnosed with T2DM. The T2DM subgroup was significantly older than the non-T2DM population (mean age: 63.39 ± 10.75 vs. 58.56 ± 12.62 years, P < 0.001). Compared with the non-T2DM population, T2DM population were more likely to be higher SBP (134.37 ± 20.62 vs. 128.83 ± 19.35, P < 0.001), lower DBP (69.65 ± 12.22 vs. 72.71 ± 11.61, P < 0.001), higher fasting blood glucose (8.68 ± 2.77 vs. 5.60 ± 0.37, P < 0.001), higher FLI (72.96 ± 25.63 vs. 52.82 ± 29.80, P < 0.001), and higher level of HbA1c (7.20 ± 1.69 vs. 5.50 ± 0.44, P < 0.001). In the T2DM subgroup, there were more people with a history of hypertension and hyperlipemia (66.7% (745) vs. 39.9% (1714); 52.9% (591) vs. 39.4% (1691), P < 0.001) than non-T2DM population. Within the T2DM subset, the prevalence of retinopathy was notably higher than in the non-T2DM population (30.3% vs. 11.8%, P < 0.001). Additionally, the T2DM subset exhibited greater BMI scores (32.14 ± 7.05 vs. 28.51 ± 6.05, P < 0.001) and higher FIB-4 scores (1.42 ± 0.80 vs. 1.30 ± 0.78, P < 0.001) compared to the non-T2DM population (Table 1).

Table 1.

Comparison of baseline characteristics between T2DM and non-T2DM population

CharacteristicsNon-T2DM population  T2DM population  χ2/tP-Value
    (n=4296)  (n=1117) 
Age (years, x̅±s)58.56 ± 12.62  63.39 ± 10.75  12.884  <0.001*** 
Sex [% (n)]    0.559  0.455 
  Male  50.0% (2146)  51.2% (572)     
Race/Ethnicity [% (n)]    99.244  <0.001*** 
  Mexican American  14.9% (638)  19.8% (221)     
  Other Hispanic  6.8% (292)  7.8% (87)     
  Non-Hispanic White  57.3% (2462)  42.3% (472)     
  Non-Hispanic Black  17.6% (758)  27.7% (309)     
  Other Race/Multi-Racial  3.4% (146)  2.5% (28)     
Height (cm, x̅±s)167.60 ± 9.90  166.23 ± 10.32  3.953  <0.001*** 
Weight (kg, x̅±s)80.30 ± 19.18  89.09 ± 22.11  12.047  <0.001*** 
BMI (kg/m2, x̅±s)28.51 ± 6.05  32.14 ± 7.01  15.682  <0.001*** 
FIB-4 score (x̅±s)1.30 ± 0.78  1.42 ± 0.80  4.629  <0.001*** 
PLT (109/L, x̅±s)267.89 ± 68.83  262.03 ± 73.15  2.416  0.016* 
ALT (U/L, x̅±s)25.26 ± 16.51  26.81 ± 29.59  1.692  0.091 
AST (U/L, x̅±s)26.49 ± 13.80  26.92 ± 18.07  0.740  0.459 
SBP (mmHg, x̅±s)128.83 ± 19.35  134.37 ± 20.62  7.527  <0.001*** 
DBP (mmHg, x̅±s)72.71 ± 11.61  69.65 ± 12.22  6.927  <0.001*** 
Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c, %, x̅±s)5.50 ± 0.44  7.20 ± 1.69  32.981  <0.001*** 
Fasting blood glucose (mmol/L, x̅±s)5.60 ± 0.37  8.68 ± 2.77  20.878  <0.001*** 
FLI52.82 ± 29.80  72.96 ± 25.63  16.254  <0.001*** 
Drinking history [% (n)]    47.704  <0.001*** 
  Yes  69.1% (2969)  58.0% (648)     
  No  29.0% (1246)  39.6% (442)     
  Unknown/Not reported  1.9% (81)  2.4% (27)     
Smoking history [% (n)]    16.680  <0.001*** 
  Everyday  18.5% (796)  14.9% (166)     
  Someday  2.5% (108)  2.1% (23)     
  Not at all  31.3% (1341)  37.5% (419)     
  Unknown/Not reported  47.7% (2051)  45.5% (509)     
Hypertension [% (n)]    259.930  <0.001*** 
  Yes  39.9% (1714)  66.7% (745)     
  No  60.0% (2579)  32.8% (367)     
  Unknown/Not reported  0.1% (3)  0.5% (5)     
Hyperlipemia [% (n)]    41.732  <0.001*** 
  Yes  39.4% (1691)  52.9% (591)     
  No  41.9% (1799)  35.0% (391)     
  Unknown/Not reported  18.7% (806)  12.1% (135)     
Hepatitis B virus infection [% (n)]    2.374  0.123 
  Yes  7.1% (307)  8.5% (95)     
  No  92.8% (3988)  91.5% (1022)     
  Unknown/Not reported  0.1 (1)       
Hepatitis C virus infection [% (n)]    6.600  0.011* 
  Yes  3.0% (128)  1.5% (17)     
  No  96.9% (4164)  98.1% (1095)     
  Unknown/Not reported  0.1% (4)  0.4% (5)     
Retinopathy severity [% (n)]    278.868  <0.001*** 
  No retinopathy (Level 1)  88.2% (3789)  69.7% (779)     
  Mild NPR (Level 2)  9.8% (421)  19.9% (222)     
  Moderate/severe NPR (Level 3)  1.4% (61)  7.7% (86)     
  PR (Level 4)  0.6% (25)  2.7% (30)     
Hepatic fibrosis grading [ % (n)]    31.860  <0.001*** 
  F0-F1  63.9% (2747)  53.2% (594)     
  F2  32.7% (1404)  40.7% (455)     
  F3-F4  3.40% (145)  6.1% (68)     

T2DM, diabetes mellitus; BMI, body mass index; FIB-4, fibrosis index-4; PLT, platelet count; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; FLI, fatty liver index; NPR, non-proliferative retinopathy; PR, proliferative retinopathy.

P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 *** P < 0.001.

3.2Clinical factors affecting hepatic fibrosis grading

Table 2 showed that age (OR: 1.162, 95%CI: 1.145-1.180, P < 0.001), sex (OR: 0.690, 95%CI: 0.490-0.974, P = 0.035), HbA1c (OR: 0.752, 95%CI: 0.600-0.943, P = 0.014), drinking history (OR: 1.573 0.752, 95%CI: 1.129-2.193, P = 0.007), hepatitis C virus infection (OR: 3.432, 95%CI: 1.642-7.171, P = 0.001), T2DM population (OR: 1.901, 95%CI: 1.441-2.510, P < 0.001) and retinopathy severity (OR: 1.521, 95%CI: 1.152-2.008, P = 0.003) were clinical factors associated with hepatic fibrosis grading after fully adjusting for relevant variables (including age, sex, race/ethnicity, HbA1c, drinking history, hypertension, hyperlipemia, Hepatitis C virus infection, T2DM population, and retinopathy severity).

Table 2.

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of clinical factors affecting hepatic fibrosis grading

Variables  Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis
  OR (95%CI)  P-Value  OR (95%CI)  P-Value 
Age (years)  1.142 (1.134-1.150)  <0.001***  1.162 (1.145-1.180)  <0.001*** 
Sex (Male vs. Female)  0.600 (0.538-0.670)  <0.001***  0.690 (0.490-0.974)  0.035* 
Race/Ethnicity  1.131 (1.070-1.194)  <0.001***  0.956 (0.840-1.089)  0.500 
Height (cm)  1.005 (1.000-1.011)  0.068  1.003 (0.943-1.066)  0.926 
Weight (kg)  0.987 (0.984-0.990)  <0.001***  1.019 (0.959-1.082)  0.542 
BMI (kg/m20.959 (0.950-0.968)  <0.001***  0.927 (0.783-1.097)  0.379 
PLT (109/L)  0.997 (0.997-0.998)  <0.001*** 
ALT (U/L)  1.021 (1.016-1.025)  <0.001*** 
AST (U/L)  0.997 (0.997-0.998)  <0.001*** 
SBP (mmHg)  1.021 (1.018-1.024)  <0.001***  1.001 (0.994-1.008)  0.807 
DBP (mmHg)  0.975 (0.971-0.980)  <0.001***  1.005 (0.994-1.017)  0.375 
Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c, %)  1.007 (0.958-1.058)  0.791  0.752 (0.600-0.943)  0.014* 
Fasting blood glucose (mmol/L)  0.995 (0.785-0.995)  0.785  1.065 (0.972-1.168)  0.178 
Drinking history (no vs. yes)  1.144 (1.019-1.283)  0.022*  1.573 (1.129-2.193)  0.007** 
Smoking history (no vs. yes)  1.088 (0.880-1.344)  0.437  0.970 (0.728-1.291)  0.833 
Hypertension (no vs. yes)  0.609 (0.546-0.679)  <0.001***  1.067 (0.825-1.381)  0.620 
Hyperlipemia (no vs. yes)  0.917 (0.847-0.994)  0.035*  0.885 (0.768-1.020)  0.091 
Hepatitis B virus infection (no vs. yes)  1.096 (0.891-1.347)  0.385  0.697 (0.433-1.121)  0.137 
Hepatitis C virus infection (no vs. yes)  1.252 (0.898-1.744)  0.185  3.432 (1.642-7.171)  0.001** 
T2DM population (no vs. yes)  1.427 (1.250-1.630)  <0.001***  1.901 (1.441-2.510)  <0.001*** 
Retinopathy severity  1.392 (1.183-1.637)  0.001**  1.521 (1.152-2.008)  0.003** 

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; T2DM, diabetes mellitus; BMI, body mass index; PLT, platelet count; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure.

P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.

3.3Association between retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis in the NHANES database

Subsequently, we probed the relationship between the onset and advancement of retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis among the 5413 participants sourced from the NHANES database. As hepatic fibrosis evolved and intensified, there was a concomitant increase in both the likelihood and severity of retinopathy. In patients with mild NPR (Level 2), patients with hepatic fibrosis grading F0-F1, F2, and F3-F4 accounted for 12.0%, 11.5%, and 13.6%, respectively. Among patients with moderate/severe NPR (Level 3), patients with hepatic fibrosis grades of F0-F1, F2, and F3-F4 accounted for 2.5%, 2.5%, and 8.6%, respectively. The ratios of hepatic fibrosis grades F0-F1, F2, and F3-F4 were 0.7%, 1.0%, and 5.2% in patients with PR (Level 4). In other words, a significant proportion (84.8%) of the F0-F1 group exhibited no retinopathy. This proportion precipitously decreased within populations presenting mild NPR, moderate/severe NPR, and PR, with respective frequencies of 12.0%, 2.5%, and 0.7%. As highlighted in Table 3, there is a significant positive correlation between hepatic fibrosis grading and retinopathy severity in the entire population (P < 0.001).

Table 3.

Chi-square test and Pearson correlation analysis between the grades of retinopathy severity and hepatic fibrosis in the entire population

VariablesHepatic fibrosis grading (Entire population)  χ2P-ValueR2P-Value
    F0-F1  F2  F3-F4   
    (n=3341)  (n=1859)  (n=213)   
Retinopathy severity [% (n)]        69.634  <0.001***  0.060  <0.001*** 
No retinopathy (Level 1)84.8% (2834)  84.9% (1579)  72.8% (155)           
Mild NPR (Level 2)12.0% (400)  11.5% (214)  13.6% (29)           
Moderate/severe NPR (Level 3)2.5% (82)  2.5% (47)  8.5% (18)           
PR (Level 4)0.7% (25)  1.0% (19)  5.2% (11)           

NPR, non-proliferative retinopathy; PR, proliferative retinopathy.

P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.

3.4Significance of retinopathy for significant hepatic fibrosis in T2DM population

The association between the grading of retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis exhibited heightened significance in the T2DM population, as suggested by Chi-square testing and Pearson correlation analysis (P < 0.001, Table 4). The correlation coefficient was found to be 0.216. The predictive capacity of retinopathy in determining hepatic fibrosis severity was assessed through the ROC analysis. The diagnostic efficiency of retinopathy (≥Level 2) was found to be most substantial for diagnosing significant hepatic fibrosis (grade of F2 or higher). The area under the ROC curve was computed as 0.722, indicating the diagnostic efficacy for significant hepatic fibrosis upon the occurrence of retinopathy (P < 0.001, Fig. 2).

Table 4.

Chi-square test and Pearson correlation analysis between the grades of retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis in T2DM population

VariablesHepatic fibrosis grading (T2DM population)  χ2P-ValueR2P-Value
    F0-F1  F2  F3-F4   
    (n=594)  (n=455)  (n=68)   
Retinopathy severity [% (n)]        104.866  <0.001***  0.216  <0.001*** 
No retinopathy (Level 1)73.1% (434)  70.8% (322)  33.8% (23)           
Mild NPR (Level 2)20.0% (119)  18.7% (85)  26.5% (18)           
Moderate/severe NPR (Level 3)6.9% (41)  6.4% (29)  23.5% (16)           
PR (Level 4)0.0% (0)  4.2% (19)  16.2% (11)           

T2DM, diabetes mellitus; NPR, non-proliferative retinopathy; PR, proliferative retinopathy.

P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.

Fig. 2.

The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of retinopathy for screening and identifying significant hepatic fibrosis in T2DM population. AUC, area under the curve.

(0.09MB).
4Discussion

The primary aim of this study was to explore the relationship between DR and hepatic fibrosis among people with T2DM. The research subjects were mainly adults living in the United States and they filled in key questions. In our study, DR severity was observed to have a positive correlation with hepatic fibrosis. As pervasive global health concerns, T2DM and hepatic fibrosis typically manifest subtly, with a significant percentage of patients showing no clear symptoms [21–23]. Without intervention, the intertwined pathophysiology of these conditions exacerbates hepatic damage in T2DM patients, thereby increasing the risks of cirrhosis and carcinoma [24]. Thus, there's an urgent need for an easily applicable, non-invasive method for early hepatic fibrosis detection in T2DM. Our study leverages adult data from the NHANES database to investigate the correlation between retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis, indicating that the presence of retinopathy may reflect the progression of hepatic fibrosis in the T2DM population.

Retinopathy, a common chronic microvascular complication of diabetes mellitus [25], involves gradual changes in retinal microvasculature [26]. Our findings align with previous research, demonstrating a significant relationship between retinopathy and hepatic fibrosis [27], notably more pronounced in diabetic patients. Previous studies have identified associations between hepatic conditions like NAFLD and retinal vessel anomalies [28]. A potential connection could be the Liver X Receptor, involved in lipid metabolism, glucose homeostasis and inflammation [29], potentially influencing susceptibility to hepatic fibrosis [30]. Insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, endothelial dysfunction, metabolic inflammation from glucose, and lipid metabolic imbalances, and oxidative stress are suggested as shared mechanisms of retinopathy in patients with diabetes and hepatic diseases [31,32].

Further, the synergistic interaction between hepatic fibrosis and diabetes has the potential to exacerbate systemic insulin resistance and hyperglycemia [32], precipitate dyslipidemia and incite the synthesis of multiple proinflammatory mediators, culminating in chronic vascular complications in diabetes [8,33] and retinopathy progression [34].

Notwithstanding the robust sample size of this study, which supports our hypothesis, the present investigation is not without limitations that warrant consideration. Firstly, given the cross-sectional study design, the causal relationship between hepatic fibrosis and retinopathy remains to be elucidated. Secondly, this study relied solely on serological markers to construct a model for gauging the severity of hepatic fibrosis without the benefit of biopsy or Fibroscan diagnostics. Thirdly, Patients with T2DM not only have a higher age but also experience an increase in Alpha 2-macroglobulin levels due to the condition itself, both of which may impact the results of FIB-4. Additionally, due to the constraints of the NHANES database, the DM population could not be subdivided into specific categories (such as type 1, type 2, and other types). Lastly, the structural similarities between the kidneys and the eyes suggest that diseases in these two organs may share common pathogenic mechanisms [35]. However, considering the incomplete data in the NHANES database, we were currently unable to analyze the relationship between retinopathy and kidney disease. The biological rationale between the retina and kidney disease underscores the importance of further exploration in future research. Further prospective research is warranted to explore the potential causal relationship between retinopathy and the onset of hepatic fibrosis among the T2DM population. We will also explore the possibility of incorporating additional analyses using other validated non-invasive tools for fibrosis.

5Conclusions

In conclusion, our research establishes retinopathy as an independent predictor of significant hepatic fibrosis in the T2DM population based on data from the NHANES database. This finding underscores the critical role of DR in identifying individuals at elevated risk for hepatic fibrosis, prompting ophthalmologists to closely monitor T2DM patients. However, the results do not seem to be definitive for a specific target population and should be interpreted cautiously.

Author contributions

Study conception: Xiaolong Qi, Chuan Liu; data acquisition: Jinze Li, Yi Xiang, Chuan Liu, Jiahao Han, Ruiying Wang, Zihe Dong, Huihui Chen, Ruixia Gao; statistical analysis: Jiahao Han, Yi Xiang; drafting the initial manuscript: Jinze Li, Yi Xiang, Xiaolong Qi; critical review of the manuscript: Xiaolong Qi, Gao-Jun-Teng, Jinze Li, Yi Xiang, Youfang Gao. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (81827805, 82130060, 61821002), National Key Research and Development Program (2018YFA0704100, 2018YFA0704104), Jiangsu Provincial Medical Innovation Center (CXZX202219), Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiation Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions and Nanjing Life Health Science and Technology Project (202205045), Changjiang Scholars Talent Cultivation Project of Zhongda Hospital of Southeast University (2023YJXYYRCPY03), the Fundamental Research Fund of Southeast University (3290002303A2), the Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province (BE2023767), Research Personnel Cultivation Programme of Zhongda Hospital Southeast University (CZXM-GSP-RC125).

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge all the clinical and research staff from the research centers.

References
[1]
I. Tuleta, NG. Frangogiannis.
Diabetic fibrosis.
Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis, 1867 (2021),
[2]
K.W. Davidson, M.J. Barry, C.M. Mangione, M. Cabana, A.B. Caughey, E.M. Davis, et al.
Screening for prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: US preventive services task force recommendation statement.
Jama, 326 (2021), pp. 736-743
[3]
A. Lonardo, A.K. Singal, N. Osna, KK. Kharbanda.
Effect of cofactors on NAFLD/NASH and MAFLD. A paradigm illustrating the pathomechanics of organ dysfunction.
Metab Target Organ Damage, 2 (2022),
[4]
G. Elpek.
Cellular and molecular mechanisms in the pathogenesis of liver fibrosis: An update.
World J Gastroenterol, 20 (2014), pp. 7260-7276
[5]
B. Dewidar, C. Meyer, S. Dooley, AN. Meindl-Beinker.
TGF-β in hepatic stellate cell activation and liver fibrogenesis-updated.
[6]
K. Cusi, S. Isaacs, D. Barb, R. Basu, S. Caprio, W.T. Garvey, et al.
American association of clinical endocrinology clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in primary care and endocrinology clinical settings: Co-sponsored by the American association for the study of liver diseases (AASLD).
Endocr Pract, 28 (2022), pp. 528-562
[7]
R.S. Taylor, R.J. Taylor, S. Bayliss, H. Hagström, P. Nasr, J.M. Schattenberg, et al.
Association between fibrosis stage and outcomes of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gastroenterology, 158 (2020), pp. 1611-1625
[8]
G. Targher, A. Lonardo, CD. Byrne.
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and chronic vascular complications of diabetes mellitus.
Nat Rev Endocrinol, 14 (2018), pp. 99-114
[9]
A.L. Sberna, B. Bouillet, A. Rouland, M.C. Brindisi, A. Nguyen, T. Mouillot, et al.
European association for the study of the liver (EASL), european association for the study of diabetes (EASD) and European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) clinical practice recommendations for the management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: evaluation of their application in people with Type 2 diabetes.
Diabet Med, 35 (2018), pp. 368-375
[10]
B.A. Davison, S.A. Harrison, G. Cotter, N. Alkhouri, A. Sanyal, C. Edwards, et al.
Suboptimal reliability of liver biopsy evaluation has implications for randomized clinical trials.
J Hepatol, 73 (2020), pp. 1322-1332
[11]
M. Eslam, P.N. Newsome, S.K. Sarin, Q.M. Anstee, G. Targher, M. Romero-Gomez, et al.
A new definition for metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease: An international expert consensus statement.
J Hepatol, 73 (2020), pp. 202-209
[12]
J.L. Wilkinson-Berka.
Angiotensin and Diabetic retinopathy.
Int J Biochem Cell Biol, 38 (2006), pp. 752-765
[13]
G.H. Zhang, T.H. Yuan, Z.S. Yue, L. Wang, GR. Dou.
The presence of diabetic retinopathy closely associated with the progression of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A meta-analysis of observational studies.
[14]
T.H. Yuan, Z.S. Yue, G.H. Zhang, L. Wang, GR. Dou.
beyond the Liver: Liver-Eye communication in clinical and experimental aspects.
[15]
G. Zipf, M. Chiappa, K.S. Porter, Y. Ostchega, B.G. Lewis, J. Dostal.
National health and nutrition examination survey: plan and operations, 1999-2010.
Vital Health Stat, 1 (2013), pp. 1-37
[16]
G. Bedogni, S. Bellentani, L. Miglioli, F. Masutti, M. Passalacqua, A. Castiglione, et al.
The fatty liver index: a simple and accurate predictor of hepatic steatosis in the general population.
BMC Gastroenterol, 6 (2006), pp. 33
[17]
2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes.
Standards of medical care in diabetes-2022.
Diabetes Care, 45 (2022), pp. S17-s38
[18]
S. Vujosevic, S.J. Aldington, P. Silva, C. Hernández, P. Scanlon, T. Peto, et al.
Screening for diabetic retinopathy: new perspectives and challenges.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 8 (2020), pp. 337-347
[19]
P. Bedossa, T. Poynard.
An algorithm for the grading of activity in chronic hepatitis C. The METAVIR cooperative study group.
Hepatology, 24 (1996), pp. 289-293
[20]
K.A. So-Armah, J.K. Lim, V. Lo Re, J.P. Tate, C.H. Chang, A.A. Butt, et al.
FIB-4 stage of liver fibrosis predicts incident heart failure among HIV-infected and uninfected patients.
Hepatology, 66 (2017), pp. 1286-1295
[21]
P. Zimmet, K.G. Alberti, D.J. Magliano, PH. Bennett.
Diabetes mellitus statistics on prevalence and mortality: facts and fallacies.
Nat Rev Endocrinol, 12 (2016), pp. 616-622
[22]
E.W. Gregg, N. Sattar, MK. Ali.
The changing face of diabetes complications.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 4 (2016), pp. 537-547
[23]
L. Caballería, G. Pera, I. Arteaga, L. Rodríguez, A. Alumà, R.M. Morillas, et al.
High prevalence of liver fibrosis among european adults with unknown liver disease: A population-based study.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 16 (2018), pp. 1138-1145
[24]
N. Chalasani, Z. Younossi, J.E. Lavine, A.M. Diehl, E.M. Brunt, K. Cusi, et al.
The diagnosis and management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: practice Guideline by the American association for the study of liver diseases, american college of gastroenterology, and the american gastroenterological association.
Hepatology, 55 (2012), pp. 2005-2023
[25]
K.Y. Lin, W.H. Hsih, Y.B. Lin, C.Y. Wen, TJ. Chang.
Update in the epidemiology, risk factors, screening, and treatment of diabetic retinopathy.
J Diabetes Investig, 12 (2021), pp. 1322-1325
[26]
R. Klein, B.E. Klein, S.E. Moss, T.Y. Wong, L. Hubbard, K.J. Cruickshanks, et al.
The relation of retinal vessel caliber to the incidence and progression of diabetic retinopathy: XIX: the wisconsin epidemiologic study of diabetic retinopathy.
Arch Ophthalmol, 122 (2004), pp. 76-83
[27]
L. Lampignano, A. Niro, F. Castellana, I. Bortone, R. Zupo, S. Tirelli, et al.
Liver fibrosis and retinal features in an older mediterranean population: Results from the salus in apulia study.
[28]
W. Yang, H. Xu, X. Yu, Y. Wang.
Association between retinal artery lesions and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
Hepatol Int, 9 (2015), pp. 278-282
[29]
R. Courtney, GE. Landreth.
LXR regulation of brain cholesterol: from development to disease.
Trends Endocrinol Metab, 27 (2016), pp. 404-414
[30]
S.W. Beaven, K. Wroblewski, J. Wang, C. Hong, S. Bensinger, H. Tsukamoto, et al.
Liver X receptor signaling is a determinant of stellate cell activation and susceptibility to fibrotic liver disease.
Gastroenterology, 140 (2011), pp. 1052-1062
[31]
A.C. Sheka, O. Adeyi, J. Thompson, B. Hameed, P.A. Crawford, S. Ikramuddin.
Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: A Review.
Jama, 323 (2020), pp. 1175-1183
[32]
M. Marušić, M. Paić, M. Knobloch, A.M. Liberati Pršo.
NAFLD, Insulin resistance, and diabetes mellitus type 2.
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021 (2021),
[33]
A. Mantovani, G. Petracca, G. Beatrice, H. Tilg, C.D. Byrne, G. Targher.
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and risk of incident diabetes mellitus: an updated meta-analysis of 501 022 adult individuals.
[34]
S.M. Marshall, A. Flyvbjerg.
Prevention and early detection of vascular complications of diabetes.
[35]
T.E. Farrah, D. Pugh, F.A. Chapman, E. Godden, C. Balmforth, G.C. Oniscu, et al.
Choroidal and retinal thinning in chronic kidney disease independently associate with eGFR decline and are modifiable with treatment.
Nat Commun, 14 (2023), pp. 7720

These authors contributed equally to this work.

Copyright © 2024. Fundación Clínica Médica Sur, A.C.
Descargar PDF
Opciones de artículo
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos