NAFLD VS MAFLD. The evidence-based debate has come. Time to change?

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) affects one-third of the world's adult population and is linked to metabolic syndrome. It can progress to steatohepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. During the last four decades, it has been the subject of exhaustive research in multiple aspects to define its epidemiology, pathophysiological mechanisms and therapy. In 2020, a group of international experts proposed the change of name to metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) with the main objective of making it an inclusive diagnosis prioritizing metabolic abnormalities. However, the change in terminology included the modification of the diagnostic criteria allowing the non-exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases such as alcohol liver disease, and chronic hepatitis B or C. The proposal precipitated a wave of debates among experts based on theoretical opinions on the desirability of the rapid adoption of the new terminology. But it also precipitated a wave of epidemiological and clinical studies which, two years later, have provided clinical evidence on the differences and similarities of the two entities, specially, those that could be considered for future refinements of the diagnostic criteria of MAFLD. Likewise, this evidence may contribute to deciding the time of adoption of this terminology. In this text, we discuss, in general terms, important aspects of the clinical evidence that has been generated to date in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies focusing on clinical characteristics and outcomes, mainly on all-cause and specific mortality of MAFLD.