The summaries are free for public
use. The Chronic Liver Disease
Foundation will continue to add and
archive summaries of articles deemed
relevant to CLDF by the Board of
Trustees and its Advisors.
Abstract Details
The NAFLD-MAFLD debate: Is there a Consensus-on-Consensus methodology?
Yasser Fouad1, Jean-François Dufour23, Ming-Hua Zheng456, Steven Bollipo7, Hailemichael Desalegn8, Henning Grønbaek9, Robert G Gish10
Author information
Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endemic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Minia University, Minia, Egypt.
Centre des Maladies Digestives, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Swiss NASH Foundation, Bern, Switzerland.
MAFLD Research Center, Department of Hepatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Institute of Hepatology, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
The Key Laboratory of Diagnosis and Treatment for the Development of Chronic Liver Disease in Zhejiang Province, Wenzhou, China.
Department of Gastroenterology, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
St. Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Department of Hepatology & Gastroenterology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California, USA.
Abstract
Polarizing opinions have recently arisen in hepatology on the name and redefinition of fatty liver disease associated with metabolic dysfunction. In spite of growing and robust evidence of the superior utility of the term metabolic (dysfunction) associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) definition for clinical and academic practice, controversy abounds. It should therefore come, as no surprise that the most common arguments used in contrarian op-eds is that there are no consensus on any name change. In this context, we suggest that discourse on an accurate understanding of what scientific consensus means, the various methods of achieving consensus, as well as other alternative models for reaching agreement is pivotal for the field. In this opinion piece, we provide an overview of these aspects as it applies to the case of fatty liver disease. We provide evidence that consensus on a change from non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to MAFLD has already been achieved. We believe that the time has come for redirecting stakeholder focus and energy on capitalizing on the momentum generated by the debate to improve the lives of people at its centre, our patients.