Efficiency of Skeletal Muscle Mass/Weight Measurement for Distinguishing Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease: A Prospective Analysis Using InBody Bioimpedance Devices
2024

Muscle Mass Measurement and Liver Disease

Sample size: 3864 publication 10 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Tatsuta Miwa, Masaki Tsutomu, Kimura Shungo, Sato Yudai, Tomida Akemi, Ishikawa Ichiro, Nakamura Yu, Takuma Kei, Nakahara Mai, Oura Kyoko, Tadokoro Tomoko, Fujita Koji, Tani Joji, Morishita Asahiro, Himoto Takashi, Miyazaki Shinjiro, Maeta Tsuyoshi, Mori Yoshihiro, Kohi Fumikazu, Kobara Hideki, Puppa Melissa

Primary Institution: KKR Takamatsu Hospital

Hypothesis

This study aimed to identify significant body composition factors associated with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) in patients undergoing health checkups.

Conclusion

Skeletal muscle mass/weight (SMM/WT) was significantly associated with MASLD, suggesting it may serve as a potential marker for diagnosis.

Supporting Evidence

  • 3864 examinees were enrolled in the study.
  • 1133 males and 454 females were diagnosed with MASLD.
  • SMM/WT was independently associated with MASLD.
  • The prevalence of sarcopenia was very low among examinees with MASLD.
  • Muscle mass assessment using SMM/WT may improve diagnosis of MASLD.

Takeaway

This study found that measuring muscle mass can help doctors figure out if someone has a liver disease called MASLD.

Methodology

The study analyzed data from 6599 examinees who underwent health checkups, focusing on body composition and its association with MASLD.

Potential Biases

Differences in age, gender, and ethnic background may affect the body composition components.

Limitations

The study was conducted at a single center, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.

Participant Demographics

The study included 2188 males and 1676 females, with a mean age around 54 years.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.0001

Confidence Interval

95% CI: 2.99–8.73 for males, 95% CI: 1.68–6.93 for females

Statistical Significance

p<0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3390/nu16244422

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication