Table 1.
Positive implications
|
Challenges
|
Useful in overcoming the dichotomization of NASH and non-NASH in clinical practices | Obtain a global acceptance as some researchers consider the name change premature and inappropriate |
Facilitate diagnosis and evaluation of disease progression in high-risk patients | Underestimation of actual prevalence of the disease using the criteria of MAFLD |
Improve awareness of physicians, healthcare providers and patients | Further clarification and stratification of the definition to guide decision-making and assess prognosis of the disease |
Improve physician-patient communication | Address the patients with fatty changes in liver in absence of metabolic derangements |
Improve clinical diagnosis and patient care | Deal with lean or undernourished individuals with hepatic fatty changes |
Reduce confusion and stigma regarding the disease | Lack of information regarding genetic risk factors, phenotyping measurements, body fat content, and alterations in gut microbiota in the new definition |
Increase public attention and improve health policy actions | Determine the outcome variable of ongoing clinical trials where “improvement in NASH” is one of the endpoints |
MAFLD: Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease; NASH: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.