• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Fatty liver is an independent risk factor for gallbladder polyps

    2021-01-13 07:45:36DongWonAhnJiBongJeongJinwooKangSuHwanKimJiWonKimByeongGwanKimKookLaeLeeSohee0hSoonHoYoonSangJoonParkDooHeeLee
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2020年44期

    Dong-Won Ahn, Ji Bong Jeong, Jinwoo Kang, Su Hwan Kim, Ji Won Kim, Byeong Gwan Kim, Kook Lae Lee,Sohee 0h, Soon Ho Yoon, Sang Joon Park, Doo Hee Lee

    Abstract

    Key Words: Gallbladder polyp; Fatty liver; Sarcopenia; Visceral obesity; Risk factors; Body fat distribution

    INTRODUCTION

    Gallbladder polyps (GBPs) are one of the most common biliary diseases and a major public health problem in many countries. The prevalence of GBP varies according to race and region[1]and diagnosis of GBP has been increasing in recent years due to the widespread use of ultrasonography (US) in routine health checkups[2]. Although benign cholesterol polyps are the most common type of GBP, accounting for 46% to 70% of all GBPs[3], some GBPs have malignant potential and the possibility of malignancy is markedly increased when the polyps are 10 mm or larger in size[2,4]. Considering the poor prognosis of advanced gallbladder cancer, it is important to detect GBPs before they reach an advanced stage.

    Determination of risk factors that contribute to GBP formation would help to design clinical strategies for screening and treatment in clinical practice. According to previous studies, old age, male gender, obesity, and metabolic syndrome are known to be associated with GBP[5-9]. Some studies have investigated the relationship between GBP and abnormal body fat distribution, such as fatty liver and visceral fat[1,4,10]. However, the results of these studies have been conflicting. Furthermore, there have been no studies evaluating the relationship between GBP and sarcopenia, which is a syndrome consisting of a progressive and generalized loss of skeletal mass and strength associated with a risk of physical disability, poor quality of life, and death[11]. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the development of GBP is associated with body composition and abnormal fat distribution, such as fatty liver, visceral obesity, or sarcopenia.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Study population

    Subjects who underwent abdominal US and body composition measurement with a noninvasive body composition analyzer on the same day during a comprehensive health evaluation at Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center between January 2015 and December 2019 were enrolled in this study. After excluding subjects with a history of previous cholecystectomy, we enrolled subjects with GBP detected with abdominal US as the GBP group. Then, we enrolled age- and sex-matched subjects who were randomly selected among subjects without GBP in a ratio of 1:2 (GBP:control) as the control group. Age and sex matching was performed because both age and sex were considered important confounders in previous studies[12].

    The study was conducted in accord with the Helsinki Declaration and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center (IRB No. 30-2020-054).

    Clinical and laboratory evaluations

    All subjects underwent basic anthropometric examination and serum chemistry testing on the same day as both abdominal US and body composition measurement with a noninvasive body composition analyzer. Serum chemistry testing was performed after an overnight (12 h) fast, and structured questionnaires were reviewed to evaluate current illness (e.g., hypertension, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome) and current medications.

    Body mass index (BMI) was calculated with division of weight (kg) by height squared (m2). Waist circumference was measured at the midpoint between the inferior margin of the last rib and the superior iliac crest in the horizontal plane. Hypertension was defined as a blood pressure of ≥ 130/85 mmHg. Diabetes mellitus was defined as a fasting glucose level of ≥ 126 mg/dL. Subjects taking antihypertensive or antidiabetic drugs were considered to have hypertension or diabetes. Metabolic syndrome was defined as the presence of at least three of the following five criteria from the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III: (1) Waist circumference ≥ 102 cm in men and ≥ 88 cm in women; (2) Triglyceride (TG) level ≥ 150 mg/dL, or with drug treatment for elevated TG level; (3) High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) level < 40 mg/dL in men and < 50 mg/dL in women, or with drug treatment for reduced HDL-C level; (4) Blood pressure ≥ 130/85 mmHg, or with drug treatment for hypertension; and (5) Fasting plasma glucose ≥ 100 mg/dL, or with drug treatment for elevated glucose[13].

    Ultrasonographic examination

    To diagnose fatty liver and GBPs, abdominal US with a 3.5 MHz convex probe (Philips iU22; Philips Healthcare, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) was performed by experienced radiologists after an overnight (10 h) fast. The radiologists performing the US were blinded to the subjects’ clinical and laboratory information.

    The diagnosis of GBPs was made when immobile features appearing to arise from the mucosa were seen without an acoustic shadow in US[14]. The diagnosis of fatty liver was made when characteristic features of “bright liver” with evident contrast between the hepatic and renal parenchyma were seen in US using previously described standardized criteria[15].

    The severity and degree of fatty liver was graded according to the criteria described in previous study[16]. Mild fatty liver was diagnosed when US showed slightly diffuse increase in bright homogenous echoes in the liver parenchyma, with normal visualization of the diaphragm and portal and hepatic vein borders. Moderate fatty liver was diagnosed when US showed diffuse increase in bright echoes in the liver parenchyma, with slightly impaired visualization of the peripheral portal and hepatic vein borders. Finally, severe fatty liver was diagnosed when US showed marked increase in bright echoes at a shallow depth, with impaired visualization of the diaphragm and marked vascular blurring. Moderate and severe fatty liver were combined into a single “moderate to severe” category because of the small number of cases of severe fatty liver.

    Body composition measurement

    Body composition measurements, including skeletal muscle mass and visceral fat area (VFA), were performed using an InBody 720 [direct segmental multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) method; Biospace, Seoul, Korea][17], a noninvasive body composition analyzer. The subjects fasted for at least 3 h and voided immediately before the BIA. In this system, body weight, BMI, skeletal muscle mass, and VFA are automatically calculated. Appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) was calculated as the sum of the lean muscle mass in the bilateral upper and lower limbs. Then, the ASM was divided by body weight (kg) and expressed as a percentage (ASM/weight, ASM%). Sarcopenia was defined as an ASM% beyond two standard deviations (SDs) below the gender-specific mean for healthy young adults according to nationwide health examinations in the Korean population (ASM% < 29.0 in men or < 22.9 in women was considered to indicate sarcopenia)[18-20]. The VFA measured by the InBody 720 was used to assess visceral obesity.

    Comparison of InBody 720 and computed tomography data

    To validate the data on skeletal muscle mass and VFA measured by the InBody 720, we investigated the correlation between the measurements taken by the InBody 720 and the measurements obtained by computed tomography (CT) in subjects who underwent both InBody 720 and CT scans on the same day. Using a CT scan, we measured the total abdominal muscle area (TAMA) and VFA at the L3 vertebral level, which showed the highest correlation with whole-body skeletal muscle and visceral fat volume in previous studies[21,22].

    All abdominal CT scans were performed using a 64-slice multidetector CT scanner (Brilliance 64 scanners; Philips Healthcare, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). To measure TAMA and VFA, precontrast CT images were uploaded to commercially available segmentation software (MEDIP Deep Catch v1.0.0.0, MEDICALIP Co. Ltd., Seoul, South Korea). The software contained a 3 dimensions (3D) U-Net that automatically segments whole-body CT images into a volumetric mask of seven body compartments: Skin, bone, muscle, visceral fat, subcutaneous fat, internal organs with vessels, and spinal cord. The 3D U-net was developed using approximately 40000 labeled wholebody CT images and provides an average segmentation accuracy for muscle, visceral, and subcutaneous fat of 96.8%-99.2%, 95.1%-98.9%, and 97.1%-99.7%, respectively, in internal and external validation datasets of whole-body CT scans. After automatic segmentation, the reader selected the level of the inferior endplate of L3 vertebra and extracted TAMA and VFA at the corresponding level (Figure 1). A clinically trained image analyst (DHL) reviewed and adjusted the results and finally a radiologist (SHY) confirmed the results.

    Statistical analysis

    Differences in categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test. Continuous variables, expressed as means ± standard deviations, were compared using Student’st-test. Some of the continuous variables were categorized according to reference values in a previous study and ATP-III NCEP, as follows[4,23]: BMI (< 23 kg/m2as normal weight, ≥ 23 kg/m2but < 25 kg/m2as overweight, ≥ 25 kg/m2as obesity), waist circumference (> 90 cmvs≤ 90 cm for males and > 80 cmvs≤ 80 cm for females), total cholesterol (< 200, 200-240, and ≥ 240 mg/dL), TG (< 150 and ≥ 150 mg/dL), and HDL cholesterol (> 40 mg/dLvs≤ 40 mg/dL for males and > 50 mg/dLvs≤ 50 mg/dL for females). Age was categorized into decades (< 30, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, and ≥ 70 years). Because a normal range of VFA has not been defined with an absolute cutoff value to date, the variable was categorized into quartiles and the lowest quartiles of VFA were used as references.

    Binary logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors associated with GBP. First, univariable logistic regression analysis was performed, then, variables withPvalues < 0.10 in the univariable analysis were entered into backward stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis to predict the best risk factors. The results of univariable and multivariable analyses are expressed as the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). An OR was considered to be statistically significant if the 95%CI did not include 1.0. To investigate the correlation between the InBody 720 and CT data, we conducted Pearson correlation analysis. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 26.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, United States). Statistical significance was defined asPvalues < 0.05.

    RESULTS

    Prevalence of GBPs in healthy patients

    Figure 1 Body morphometric evaluations of abdominal fat and muscle areas. At the level of the inferior endplate of the L3 vertebra, a segmented axial computed tomography image showed the visceral fat area, subcutaneous fat area, and total abdominal muscle area (cm2), including all muscles on selected axial images, i.e., psoas, paraspinals, transversus abdominis, rectus abdominis, quadratus lumborum, and internal and external obliques.

    From January 2015 to December 2019, a total of 13702 subjects underwent health evaluation including abdominal US and body measurement performed on the same day. After excluding 204 subjects with a history of previous cholecystectomy, 13498 subjects were enrolled in this study (Figure 2). GBPs were found in 1405 subjects (10.4%); 897 out of 7335 male subjects (12.2%) and 508 out of 6163 female subjects (8.2%) had GBPs. The age distribution of the subjects with GBPs is shown in Table 1. The prevalence of GBP tended to be higher in male subjects, and the prevalence by age peaked in the 3rddecade (Table 1).

    Baseline characteristics of the study subjects

    The 1405 subjects with GBPs (GBP group) were compared with 2810 age- and sexmatched control subjects without GBPs (control group). The baseline characteristics of the study subjects (GBP group and control group) are listed in Table 2. The mean age of the subjects was 46.8 ± 11.7 years, and 63.8% were male. The rates of fatty liver and sarcopenia among the study subjects were 43.1% and 7.2%, respectively, and the mean VFA of the study subjects was 93.8 ± 36.6 cm2.

    The GBP group had a higher prevalence of fatty liver (45.8%vs41.7%,P= 0.013) and lower levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (26.02 ± 17.18vs27.80 ± 15.39,P= 0.001) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (26.50 ± 22.88vs29.02 ± 22.00,P= 0.001). However, no significant differences were found between the two groups in the prevalence of sarcopenia, hypertension, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome. There was also no significant difference in BMI, waist circumference, or VFA between the two groups.

    Risk factors for GBPs

    We attempted to identify the risk factors for GBP. The candidate variables associated with GBP according to univariable analysis are shown in Table 3. The presence of fatty liver and sarcopenia, and the levels of AST, ALT, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) tended to differ between the two groups (Table 3). However, BMI, waist circumference, and visceral obesity (VFA) were not significantly associated with GBP. Multivariable analysis indicated that the presence of fatty liver (OR, 1.413; 95%CI, 1.218-1.638;P< 0.001) and low ALT levels (OR, 0.993; 95%CI, 0.989-0.996;P< 0.001) were independent risk factors for GBP (Table 4).

    We next investigated whether the degree of fatty liver was associated with GBP according to polyp size (≥ 5 mm and < 5 mm). Multivariable analysis adjusted for age, gender, and candidate variables in univariable analysis revealed that fatty liver showed both independent (OR, 1.413; 95%CI, 1.218-1.638;P< 0.001) and dosedependent relationship (moderate to severe fatty liver; OR 1.631; 95%CI, 1.317-2.020;P< 0.001) with GBP (Table 5). Furthermore, this independent and dose-dependent relationship was strengthened in the larger GBP group (moderate to severe fatty liver; OR 2.137; 95%CI, 1.662-2.749;P< 0.001, Table 5). In contrast, only a marginal association between the degree of fatty liver and GBP was observed in the smaller GBP group (P= 0.038, Table 5).

    Correlation between computed tomography and InBody 720 data

    Among a total of 13498 enrolled subjects, 361 underwent CT scans on the same day asInBody 720 measurements. So, correlation analysis was performed in these 361 subjects. ASM measured by the InBody 720 was positively correlated with TAMA measured by CT (R= 0.870,P< 0.001, Figure 3). VFA measured by the InBody 720 was also positively correlated with VFA measured by CT (R= 0.708,P< 0.001, Figure 4).

    Table 1 Age distribution of the whole study population and subjects with gallbladder polyps

    DISCUSSION

    GBP has become one of the most common biliary tract diseases seen in clinical practice due to the widespread use of US for routine health checkups. Because some GBPs have malignant potential, it is important to detect GBPs before they reach advanced stages, and determination of risk factors for GBP has clinical significance. Many studies have investigated the risk factors of GBP and demonstrated that metabolic diseases such as dyslipidemia, glucose intolerance, and metabolic syndrome are associated with GPB[5-8]. Considering the close association between these metabolic diseases and changes in body fat distribution[1], some studies have investigated whether abnormal body fat distribution, such as visceral fat or fatty liver, is related to GBP[1,4,10]. However, those studies have produced conflicting results. Furthermore, there have been no studies evaluating the relationship between GBP and sarcopenia, which is one of the most important indicators of body composition. Thus, we conducted this crosssectional study to validate the results of previous studies and to clarify these issues by using data from routine health checkups in large number of subjects. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to comprehensively evaluate the potential associations between GBP and various indicators of body composition and fat distribution, such as fatty liver, visceral obesity, and sarcopenia. The results of this study show that fatty liver is an independent risk factor for GBP, whereas visceral obesity and sarcopenia are not associated with GBP.

    Sarcopenia is defined as a syndrome consisting of a progressive and generalized loss of skeletal mass and strength associated with a risk of physical disability, poor quality of life, and death[11]. Skeletal muscle is known to play a key role in the maintenance of glucose homeostasis, and a reduction in skeletal muscle mass can cause insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction, resulting in metabolic diseases[24,25]. One previous study reported that skeletal muscle mass in the lower limbs negatively contributes to VFA in healthy men[26]. One retrospective cross-sectional study reported that visceral obesity measured by VFA is an independent risk factor for GBP[4]. Given the results of these previous studies, we hypothesized that sarcopenia and visceral obesity, together with fatty liver, would be related to GBP. However, the results of the current study with an age- and sex-matched population show that only fatty liver is an independent risk factor; we observed no association between GBP and either visceral obesity or sarcopenia. There is a discrepancy between our results and those of the above-mentioned study demonstrating a significant association between GBP and visceral obesity[4]. There are several possible explanations for this discrepancy. First, it may be partially attributable to the difference in variables used in the analyses. Fatty liver was not investigated as a possible risk factor in the previous study. Second, there was a large difference in the number of study subjects. The GBP group contained 1405 subjects in the current study, whereas there were fewer than 100 subjects in the previous study.

    In the current study, the positive association between GBP and fatty liver persistedafter adjustment of other variables in the multivariable analysis, whereas neither diabetes, BMI, and metabolic syndrome, which are known to be related to metabolic diseases, were associated with GBP. These results suggest that a direct association between GBP and fatty liver may exist. One previous retrospective cross-sectional study using data from routine health checkups in a large number of subjects reported similar results[1]. In that study, GBP was significantly associated with the presence and degree of fatty liver, whereas no association was observed with metabolic syndrome or visceral obesity. Given these results, the authors suggested that hepatic fat, which is anatomically close to GB fossa, might play a more important role than visceral fat[1]. More studies regarding the mechanism and pathogenesis of these direct relationships are needed.

    Table 2 Comparison of baseline characteristics between the subjects with and without gallbladder polyps

    A recent meta-analysis showed that GBP formation was not correlated with fatty liver[10]. However, among a total of 3 studies investigating the relationship between GBP and fatty liver and included in the meta-analysis, two were not age- and sexmatched; also, the definition of fatty liver was not clear in either of those two studies[27,28].

    In the current study, fatty liver was found to be associated with GBP in a dosedependent manner. Furthermore, this independent and dose-dependent relationship was strengthened in the larger GBP group. These results are in agreement with those of the abovementioned previous study[1]. It is known that possibility of adenoma ishigher in large GBPs than in smaller GBPs. So, according to the results of both the current and previous studies, fatty liver may be a risk factor not only of cholesterol GBP but also of adenomatous GBP, and careful verification using abdominal US to detect adenomatous GBP, which is a premalignant lesion, may be warranted, especially in patients with severe fatty liver. However, a further prospective study with a larger number of subjects is needed to further validate and clarify these issues.

    Table 3 Univariable analysis of the risk factors for gallbladder polyps

    Yes 0.797 0.616-1.031 0.084 Visceral fat area (cm2)Quartile I (male < 81.8, female < 55.2)1.000 Quartile II (male 81.8-100.8, female 55.2-71.6)1.069 0.890-1.283 0.477 Quartile III (male 100.8-121.8, female 71.6-92.5)0.951 0.793-1.140 0.585 Quartile IV (male > 121.8, female > 92.5)0.853 0.721-1.010 0.066 Fatty liver No 1.000 Yes 1.178 1.035-1.340 0.013 OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence level; BMI: Body mass index; AST: Aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: Alanine aminotransferase; hs-CRP: High-sensitivity C-reactive protein; CEA: Carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9: Carbohydrate antigen 19-9; HBsAg: Hepatitis B virus surface antigen; HCV Ab: Hepatitis C virus antibody; HDL: High-density lipoprotein.

    Table 4 Multivariable analysis of the risk factors for gallbladder polyps

    Currently, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and CT are the most accurate tools for evaluating skeletal muscle mass and visceral fat[25]. In the abovementioned previous studies on the risk factors of GBP, CT was used to measure visceral fat[1,4]. However, routine use of these tools is limited in clinical practice due to associated radiation exposure. So, in the current study, the InBody 720 was used to evaluate skeletal muscle mass and visceral fat. This tool has several strengths for application in clinical practice. First, it is non-invasive and easy to use[25,29,30]. Second, previous studies have demonstrated excellent correlations between InBody 720 data and that of DEXA and CT for evaluating skeletal muscle mass and visceral fat[31-33]. Furthermore, recent studies have used the InBody 720 to assess skeletal muscle mass and to diagnose sarcopenia[25,34]. Finally, the current study showed that skeletal muscle mass and visceral fat measured with the InBody 720 were positively correlated with those measured by CT scan. According to the results of the current and previous studies, we believe that this BIA system is a valid option for assessing sarcopenia and visceral obesity in clinical practice.

    The strengths and advantages of the current study are as follows. First, age and sex matching was conducted when selecting control subjects. It is well-established that the prevalence of GBP tends to increase with age and in men. Second, this study is the first to comprehensively evaluate the potential association between GBP and various indicators of abnormal body composition and fat distribution, such as fatty liver, visceral obesity, and sarcopenia. Through this comprehensive investigation, we showed an independent and dose-dependent relationship between GBP and fatty liver, especially in subjects with large GBPs. The results of this study validate those of the abovementioned previous study[1], and suggest that careful assessment of GBP using abdominal US be considered in patients with severe fatty liver.

    Despite its advantages, the current study has several limitations. First, because ofthe cross-sectional design, it was difficult to assess the causal or temporal relationship between fatty liver and GBP. Second, the final histology of GBP could not be confirmed in the enrolled subjects with the data from routine health checkups. Third, abdominal US was used to assess the presence and severity of fatty liver. Intra- and inter-observer variability can be a problem in assessments with abdominal US; liver biopsy is the gold standard for assessment of the presence and severity of fatty liver. However, liver biopsy is an invasive procedure and routine application of this procedure is difficult in clinical practice, especially in the setting of routine health checkups. US has several advantages, including safety, low cost, sensitivity, and specificity[1,16], and has been used as a first-line imaging in both clinical practice and epidemiological studies[35]. Finally, a selection bias might be present due to the singlecenter design of the current study.

    Table 5 Multivariable analysis of the association between gallbladder polyps and fatty liver grades according to gallbladder polyp size

    Figure 2 Diagram of showing enrollment of the study population. GBP: Gallbladder polyp.

    Figure 3 Correlation between the appendicular skeletal muscle mass measured by InBody 720 and the total abdominal muscle area measured by computed tomography scan. ASM: Appendicular skeletal muscle mass; TAMA: Total abdominal muscle area; CT: Computed tomography.

    Figure 4 Correlation between the visceral fat area area measured by InBody 720 and computed tomography scan. VFA: Visceral fat area; CT: Computed tomography.

    CONCLUSION

    In conclusion, the current study shows that fatty liver is associated with an increased risk of GBP in a dose-dependent manner. However, we found no significant relationship between GBP and sarcopenia or visceral obesity. Further prospective and multi-center studies are needed to validate these results and to explain the pathogenesis of the relationship seen in the current study.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research motivation

    Considering the importance of early detection of GBP, determination of risk factors for GBP might have clinical significance. Although some studies have investigated the relationship between GBP and abnormal body fat distribution, those studies are not sufficient and have produced conflicting results.

    Research objectives

    In this study, we aimed to determine whether the development of GBP is associated with body fat distribution such as fatty liver, visceral obesity, or sarcopenia.

    Research methods

    This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using data from routine health checkups in a single tertiary center. Based on review of the medical records of subjects who underwent various laboratory tests, body composition measurement, and abdominal ultrasonography, 1405 subjects with GBPs were compared with 2810 age- and sex-matched controls.

    Research results

    Among the body fat distributions, only the presence of fatty liver was an independent risk factor for GBP [odds ratio (OR) 1.413; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.218-1.638;P< 0.001). Furthermore, fatty liver showed both independent (OR 1.629; 95%CI, 1.335-1.988;P< 0.001) and dose-dependent (moderate to severe fatty liver; OR 2.137; 95%CI, 1.662-2.749;P< 0.001) relationship with large GBPs (≥ 5 mm). However, visceral obesity and sarcopenia were not significantly associated with GBP.

    Research conclusions

    Fatty liver was associated with an increased risk of GBP in a dose-dependent manner especially in larger GBPs.

    Research perspectives

    The results of our study suggest the need of careful assessment of GBP using abdominal ultrasonography in patients with severe fatty liver. Further studies are warranted to validate the results and to explain the pathogenesis of this relationship seen in our study.

    高清视频免费观看一区二区| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 全区人妻精品视频| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91 | 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 日韩av免费高清视频| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 自线自在国产av| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 中文欧美无线码| 色哟哟·www| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 国产成人精品福利久久| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区 | 成人综合一区亚洲| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 精品久久久久久电影网| 午夜91福利影院| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线 | 国产一区二区三区av在线| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 亚洲内射少妇av| 在现免费观看毛片| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 精品久久久久久电影网| 亚洲四区av| 丁香六月天网| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 色网站视频免费| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 嫩草影院新地址| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 国产精品伦人一区二区| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 精品久久久久久电影网| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 搡老乐熟女国产| 99热6这里只有精品| 少妇的逼水好多| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 综合色丁香网| 亚洲图色成人| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 视频区图区小说| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 青春草国产在线视频| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 永久免费av网站大全| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 多毛熟女@视频| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放 | 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲精品一二三| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 97在线视频观看| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 丝袜喷水一区| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 国产乱来视频区| 久久热精品热| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看 | 国产一区二区在线观看av| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 成年人免费黄色播放视频 | av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 少妇的逼好多水| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 中国国产av一级| av国产精品久久久久影院| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 国产精品三级大全| 精品久久久精品久久久| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频 | 七月丁香在线播放| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 亚洲国产色片| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 观看av在线不卡| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线 | 亚洲在久久综合| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 国产成人91sexporn| 人人澡人人妻人| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 久久久欧美国产精品| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 777米奇影视久久| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 亚洲国产av新网站| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 18+在线观看网站| 在线看a的网站| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 少妇的逼好多水| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 国产淫语在线视频| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 在线观看三级黄色| 国产美女午夜福利| av视频免费观看在线观看| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 亚洲av福利一区| 51国产日韩欧美| 亚洲性久久影院| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 女人久久www免费人成看片| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 日本欧美视频一区| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 曰老女人黄片| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 久久久欧美国产精品| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 高清av免费在线| 精品久久久精品久久久| 久久久久久久国产电影| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 欧美另类一区| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 国产淫语在线视频| av天堂中文字幕网| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 欧美xxxx性猛交bbbb| 成人综合一区亚洲| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看 | 久久99热6这里只有精品| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 在现免费观看毛片| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 国产精品免费大片| 内地一区二区视频在线| av网站免费在线观看视频| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 视频中文字幕在线观看| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 国产毛片在线视频| 国产成人精品无人区| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 少妇的逼水好多| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| av天堂久久9| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 久久久久视频综合| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 亚洲国产精品999| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 国产视频内射| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 色94色欧美一区二区| 九色成人免费人妻av| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 亚洲第一av免费看| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 国产综合精华液| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 精品久久久噜噜| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 自线自在国产av| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 久热久热在线精品观看| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 欧美3d第一页| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 亚洲内射少妇av| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 国产在线免费精品| 777米奇影视久久| 色视频www国产| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 亚洲成色77777| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频 | 久久午夜福利片| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 99久久人妻综合| 男女边摸边吃奶| 嫩草影院入口| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 午夜av观看不卡| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 一级爰片在线观看| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 国产av国产精品国产| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 熟女电影av网| 国产成人精品婷婷| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 久久久欧美国产精品| 日本午夜av视频| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 一级爰片在线观看| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| av天堂久久9| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频 | 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 亚洲内射少妇av| 另类精品久久| 看免费成人av毛片| www.色视频.com| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲性久久影院| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 午夜影院在线不卡| 国产成人精品无人区| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| av在线app专区| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 51国产日韩欧美| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 久久久久久久久久成人| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 伦理电影免费视频| 99热这里只有是精品50| 亚洲国产av新网站| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 久久 成人 亚洲| 伦精品一区二区三区| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 日韩电影二区| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看 | 色5月婷婷丁香| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| www.色视频.com| 99久久人妻综合| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 久久久久久久国产电影| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区 | 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 精品久久久精品久久久| 国产黄片美女视频| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 少妇高潮的动态图| 午夜福利视频精品| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| videossex国产| 九草在线视频观看| 久久6这里有精品| 黄色一级大片看看| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 大香蕉久久网| 嫩草影院入口| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 亚洲国产av新网站| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 观看免费一级毛片| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 多毛熟女@视频| av视频免费观看在线观看| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 国产毛片在线视频| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 欧美区成人在线视频| 婷婷色综合www| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| freevideosex欧美| 在线观看www视频免费| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 一级av片app| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91 | 嫩草影院新地址| 精品酒店卫生间| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 午夜免费观看性视频| 一级片'在线观看视频| 欧美97在线视频| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 秋霞伦理黄片| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看 | av天堂久久9| 伦精品一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 国产美女午夜福利| a级毛片在线看网站| av不卡在线播放| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 午夜福利,免费看| 美女国产视频在线观看| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 男女边摸边吃奶| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 国产探花极品一区二区| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 午夜视频国产福利| www.色视频.com| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放 | 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 国产永久视频网站| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| .国产精品久久| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| av视频免费观看在线观看| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 午夜影院在线不卡| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 国产 一区精品| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 日本黄大片高清| 插阴视频在线观看视频| .国产精品久久| 嫩草影院入口| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 少妇高潮的动态图| 一本一本综合久久| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 人人澡人人妻人| 熟女av电影| 久久久精品94久久精品| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 丝袜喷水一区| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 精品国产一区二区久久| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 91精品国产九色| 日本黄大片高清| 桃花免费在线播放| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 国产精品无大码| 另类精品久久| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 亚洲中文av在线| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡 | 97在线人人人人妻| 国产成人91sexporn| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 久久久久久久国产电影| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区 | 亚洲成人av在线免费| 亚洲成人手机| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 少妇高潮的动态图| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 九色成人免费人妻av| 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 高清av免费在线| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| xxx大片免费视频| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 桃花免费在线播放| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 久久久久久伊人网av| 精品亚洲成国产av| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 97超视频在线观看视频| 丝袜喷水一区| 大码成人一级视频| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级 | 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 色网站视频免费| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 人妻系列 视频| 色吧在线观看| 内射极品少妇av片p| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 久久久久久久精品精品| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美 | 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 一个人免费看片子| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 永久网站在线| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 国产黄片美女视频| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 久久av网站| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 日韩中字成人| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 一级毛片我不卡| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 深夜a级毛片| 自线自在国产av| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 亚洲中文av在线| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 亚洲av.av天堂| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 国内精品宾馆在线| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区 | 777米奇影视久久| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 桃花免费在线播放| 国产成人freesex在线| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 99热网站在线观看| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 曰老女人黄片| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 美女国产视频在线观看| 亚洲在久久综合| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www | 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看 | 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 一级a做视频免费观看| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 人体艺术视频欧美日本|