Bridging Metabolic-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease and Cardiovascular Risk: A Potential Role for Ketogenesis.

The prevalence of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) is a growing global health concern. Recent advances have demonstrated significant reductions in acute cardiovascular events through the management of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors. However, these factors are responsible for about 50% of the global cardiovascular disease burden. Considering that CVDs are one of the top mortality causes worldwide, the concept of residual cardiovascular risk is an important emerging area of study. Different factors have been proposed as sources of residual risk markers, including non-HDL particles characterization, as well as inflammation measured by serum and imaging technics. Among these, metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) remains controversial. Two opposing viewpoints contend: one positing that fatty liver disease merely reflects classical risk factors and thus adds no additional risk and another asserting that fatty liver disease independently impacts cardiovascular disease incidence. To address this dilemma, one hypothetical approach is to identify specific hepatic energy-yielding mechanisms and assess their impact on the cardiovascular system. Ketogenesis, a metabolic intermediate process particularly linked to energy homeostasis during fasting, might help to link these concepts. Ketogenic metabolism has been shown to vary through MASLD progression. Additionally, newer evidence supports the significance of circulating ketone bodies in cardiovascular risk prediction. Furthermore, ketogenic metabolism modification seems to have a therapeutic impact on cardiovascular and endothelial damage. Describing the relationship, if any, between steatotic liver disease and cardiovascular disease development through ketogenesis impairment might help to clarify MASLD's role in cardiovascular risk. Furthermore, this evidence might help to solve the controversy surrounding liver steatosis impact in CVD and might lead to a more accurate risk assessment and therapeutic targets in the pursuit of precision medicine.

Osmotic Demyelination Syndrome in a Normonatremic Patient Under Treatment With Proton Pump Inhibitors.

A 66-year-old woman was admitted to the emergency department with diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting as well as low-grade fever. She was initially treated with ciprofloxacin and metronidazole with symptomatic improvement and was discharged. One week later, she returned to the emergency department for gait instability, dizziness, and vomiting and had a witnessed generalized tonic-clonic seizure in the hospital. During both admissions, the presence of ionic alterations such as severe hypomagnesemia, hypophosphatemia, and hypokalemia stood out, while sodium levels remained normal. Among her antecedents, she had a hiatal hernia and had been receiving treatment with omeprazole for years.

Eosinophilic Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis Presentation After Nandrolone Withdrawal.

A 41-year-old man was admitted to the Emergency Department with bilateral numbness in lower extremities and left femoral palsy. He also reported constitutional symptoms, vomiting and non-bloody diarrhoea for the last several months. He had a previous history of eosinophilic asthma with erratic follow-up. During admission, eosinophil count was 66% of white blood cells. Sural nerve biopsy revealed vasculitis with eosinophilic infiltration. Further evaluations consisted of colonoscopy and nasal endoscopy that confirmed eosinophil infiltrates on colonic ulcers and nasal polypi. The patient was started on systemic corticosteroids and cyclophosphamide. Among his personal records, he had been taking nandrolone decanoate without medical prescription, and had withdrawn a few years before the first asthma exacerbation.

Long-term outcomes and predictive ability of non-invasive scoring systems in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Non-invasive scoring systems (NSS) are used to identify patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) who are at risk of advanced fibrosis, but their reliability in predicting long-term outcomes for hepatic/extrahepatic complications or death and their concordance in cross-sectional and longitudinal risk stratification remain uncertain. METHODS: The most common NSS (NFS, FIB-4, BARD, APRI) and the Hepamet fibrosis score (HFS) were assessed in 1,173 European patients with NAFLD from tertiary centres. Performance for fibrosis risk stratification and for the prediction of long-term hepatic/extrahepatic events, hepatocarcinoma (HCC) and overall mortality were evaluated in terms of AUC and Harrell's c-index. For longitudinal data, NSS-based Cox proportional hazard models were trained on the whole cohort with repeated 5-fold cross-validation, sampling for testing from the 607 patients with all NSS available. RESULTS: Cross-sectional analysis revealed HFS as the best performer for the identification of significant (F0-1 vs. F2-4, AUC = 0.758) and advanced (F0-2 vs. F3-4, AUC = 0.805) fibrosis, while NFS and FIB-4 showed the best performance for detecting histological cirrhosis (range AUCs 0.85-0.88). Considering longitudinal data (follow-up between 62 and 110 months), NFS and FIB-4 were the best at predicting liver-related events (c-indices>0.7), NFS for HCC (c-index = 0.9 on average), and FIB-4 and HFS for overall mortality (c-indices >0.8). All NSS showed limited performance (c-indices <0.7) for extrahepatic events. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, NFS, HFS and FIB-4 outperformed APRI and BARD for both cross-sectional identification of fibrosis and prediction of long-term outcomes, confirming that they are useful tools for the clinical management of patients with NAFLD at increased risk of fibrosis and liver-related complications or death. LAY SUMMARY: Non-invasive scoring systems are increasingly being used in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease to identify those at risk of advanced fibrosis and hence clinical complications. Herein, we compared various non-invasive scoring systems and identified those that were best at identifying risk, as well as those that were best for the prediction of long-term outcomes, such as liver-related events, liver cancer and death.