Association between non alcoholic fatty liver disease, metabolic and vascular risk

BACKGROUND

Hepatic steatosis is a public health problem with increased incidence and prevalence OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the liver steatosis, as measured by the Fatty Liver Index (FLI), is related to metabolic risk and vascular factors and, if so, to identify the clinical-metabolic factor that explains the higher vascular risk.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study including a sample of 531 men who came to the University of Navarra Clinic Check-up Unit. The degree of steatosis was determined by the FLI. The metabolic risk was assessed using a scale based on determinations of HDL, LDL, triglycerides, blood glucose, HOMA-IR, neutrophil/lymphocyte index, and systolic blood pressure. The vascular risk was assessed by the presence of carotid and/or femoral atheromatous plaques. The dose-response association between FLI and both risks was analysed using non-parametric models (splines) and logistic regression.

RESULTS

The sample studied had a mean age of 52.70years, with 49.3% having an FLI ≥60, as well as 33.6% with metabolic syndrome, and 43.9% with carotid and/or femoral atheromatous plaques. The relationship between FLI and metabolic risk and vascular was linear (metabolic: non-linear P=.097; linear P<.001; vascular: non-linear P=1.000; linear P=.028). For every 10 units of increase in FLI, the odds of presenting with atheroma plaques increased by 9.7% (OR=1.097; 95% confidence interval 1.010-1.191). When adjusting for triglyceridaemia, the association disappeared (OR=1.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with fatty liver disease had an increased metabolic and vascular risk. The increased vascular risk is associated with the triglyceride level. On a clinical level, this study suggests that these patients could benefit from treatment of hypertriglyceridaemia.

Migraine worsening after COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination: Are we facing a nocebo effect?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In clinical practice patients may report migraine worsening as a consequence of COVID-19 (either infection or vaccines), however, data in this area are lacking. We aimed to investigate the link between COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination with migraine worsening and its associated factors.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to migraine patients followed up in a Spanish Headache Clinic, collecting demographic data, and information regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. We asked patients if they had noticed worsening of their migraine after these events and assessed concerns about infection, vaccination and migraine worsening. We also extracted data from participants' own electronic diaries (e-diaries), including 1-month data before and after their reported infection and/or vaccination. We compared participants who self-reported migraine worsening since infection or vaccination with those who did not.

RESULTS

Of 550 participants, 44.9% (247/550) reported having had COVID-19 at least once and 83.3% (458/550) had been vaccinated. Sixty-one patients reported migraine worsening since COVID-19 and 52 since the vaccination. Among the risk factors for perceived migraine worsening in the two settings (infection and vaccination) was concern about migraine worsening itself (infection: odds ratio [OR] 2.498 [95% CI: 1.02-6.273], p = 0.046; vaccination: OR 17.3 [95% CI: confidence interval 5.3-68], p < 0.001). e-diary information was available for 136 of the 550 patients, 38.2% (52/136) for COVID-19 and 39.7% (54/136) for vaccination. We observed no significant difference in headache frequency 1 month before and after infection or vaccination, even when comparing patients with and without self-reported migraine worsening.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary data point to a negligible role of the infection and vaccination on migraine worsening and to the possible presence of a nocebo effect in these settings, as a remarkable proportion of patients had a clear perception of migraine worsening.