Background and Aims A few case reports of autoimmune hepatitis–like liver injury have been reported after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) vaccination. We evaluated clinical features, treatment response and outcomes of liver injury following SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination in a large case series. Approach and Results We collected data from cases in 18 countries. The type of liver injury was assessed with the R‐value. The study population was categorized according to features of immune‐mediated hepatitis (positive autoantibodies and elevated immunoglobulin G levels) and corticosteroid therapy for the liver injury. We identified 87 patients (63%, female), median age 48 (range: 18–79) years at presentation. Liver injury was diagnosed a median 15 (range: 3–65) days after vaccination. Fifty‐one cases (59%) were attributed to the Pfizer‐BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccine, 20 (23%) cases to the Oxford‐AstraZeneca (ChAdOX1 nCoV‐19) vaccine and 16 (18%) cases to the Moderna (mRNA‐1273) vaccine. The liver injury was predominantly hepatocellular (84%) and 57% of patients showed features of immune‐mediated hepatitis. Corticosteroids were given to 46 (53%) patients, more often for grade 3–4 liver injury than for grade 1–2 liver injury (88.9% vs. 43.5%, p = 0.001) and more often for patients with than without immune‐mediated hepatitis (71.1% vs. 38.2%, p = 0.003). All patients showed resolution of liver injury except for one man (1.1%) who developed liver failure and underwent liver transplantation. Steroid therapy was withdrawn during the observation period in 12 (26%) patients after complete biochemical resolution. None had a relapse during follow‐up. Conclusions SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination can be associated with liver injury. Corticosteroid therapy may be beneficial in those with immune‐mediated features or severe hepatitis. Outcome was generally favorable, but vaccine‐associated liver injury led to fulminant liver failure in one patient.

No abstract

While non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a prevalent and frequent cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality, it is also strongly associated with cardiovascular disease-related morbidity and mortality, likely driven by its associations with insulin resistance and other manifestations of metabolic dysregulation. However, few satisfactory pharmacological treatments are available for NAFLD due in part to its complex pathophysiology, and challenges remain in stratifying individual patient’s risk for liver and cardiovascular disease related outcomes. In this review, we describe the development and progression of NAFLD, including its pathophysiology and outcomes. We also describe different tools for identifying patients with NAFLD who are most at risk of liver-related and cardiovascular-related complications, as well as current and emerging treatment options, and future directions for research.

Background and Aims: Clinical and public health implications of the recent redefining of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) remain unclear. We sought to determine the prevalence and compare MAFLD with NAFLD in a well-defined cohort. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in regional Victoria with participants from randomly selected households. Demographic and health-related clinical and laboratory data were obtained. Fatty liver was defined as a fatty liver index ≥ 60 with MAFLD defined according to recent international expert consensus. Results: A total of 722 participants were included. Mean age was 59.3 ± 16 years, and 55.3% were women with a median body mass index of 27.8 kg/m 2 . Most (75.2%) participants were overweight or obese. MAFLD was present in 341 participants giving an unadjusted prevalence of 47.2% compared with a NAFLD prevalence of 38.7%. Fifty-nine (17.5%) participants met the criteria of MAFLD but not NAFLD. The increased prevalence of MAFLD in this cohort was primarily driven by dual etiology of fatty liver. All participants classified as NAFLD met the new definition of MAFLD. Compared with NAFLD subjects, participants with MAFLD had higher ALT (26.0 [14.0] U/L vs 30.0 [23] U/L, P = 0.024), but there were no differences in non-invasive markers for steatosis or fibrosis. Conclusion: Metabolic-associated fatty liver disease is a highly prevalent condition within this large community cohort. Application of the MAFLD definition increased prevalence of fatty liver disease by including people with dual etiologies of liver disease.