当前位置： SCI文献检索 > Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences期刊下所有文献 > Friedewald's equation for calculating LDL-cholesterol: Is it the time to say "Goodbye" and adopt direct LDL cholesterol methods?

Friedewald's equation for calculating LDL-cholesterol: Is it the time to say "Goodbye" and adopt direct LDL cholesterol methods?

Abstract：

Objectives:To measure correlation and concordance between measured LDL cholesterol (mLDLc) and Friedewald's calculated LDL cholesterol (cLDLc). To compare the mLDLc and cLDLc values for various anthropometric measures and biochemical indices including insulin resistance, nephropathy, glycated hemoglobin and triglycerides. Methods:Two hundred thirty two subjects were included in this cross-sectional analysis from Jan-2016 to July-2017 from a target population visiting PNS HAFEEZ hospital. Mean age of the subjects was 46.56(±11.95) years (n=232). These subjects underwent clinical evaluation including measurement of anthropometric measurements, biochemical testing for fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), lipid profile, urine albumin creatinine ratio (UACR), and insulin. Correlation and concordance between mLDLc and Friedewald's cLDLc were measured. Finally, Comparison of risk evaluation for mLDLc and cLDLc between groups formulated based upon UACR (Based upon a cut off of 2.5 mg/g) and fasting triglycerides (Group-1 :< 1.0 mmol/L, Group-2: 1.0-1.99 mmol/L and Group-3 :> 1.99 mmol/) was carried out. Results:There was significant positive linear correlation between mLDLc and cLDLc [r=0.468, <0.001]. Kendall's Coefficient of concordance between mLDLc and cLDLc was 0.055 (p<0.001). Differences evaluated by one way ANOVA analysis for mLDLc between various triglycerides groups were only significant between group-1 and group-2 [{Group-1:Mean=2.40, (2.19-2.61), n=43}, {Group-2:Mean=2.81, (2.69-2.92), n=136}, [{Group-3:Mean=2.59,(2.37-2.81), n=53}],(p=0.004) in comparison to cLDLc [{Group-1:Mean=2.63, (2.43-2.84), n=43}, {Group-2:Mean=2.85, (2.76-2.93), n=136}, [{Group-3:Mean=2.75, (2.60-2.90), n=53}]. Calculated method for LDLc showed higher UACR than mLDLc. (p=0.021). Conclusion:cLDLc over estimates LDL-cholesterol in comparison to mLDLc. The correlation between cLDLc and mLDLc was only moderate. However, cLDLc provided better degree of risk prediction for nephropathy and glycated hemoglobin than mLDLc.

journal_name

Pak J Med Sci

journal_title

Pakistan journal of medical sciences

authors

Khan SH,Niazi NK,Sobia F,Fazal N,Manzoor SM,Nadeem A

doi

10.12669/pjms.35.2.679

subject

Has Abstract

pub_date

2019-03-01 00:00:00

pages

388-393

issue

eissn

1682-024X

issn

1681-715X

pii

PJMS-35-388

journal_volume

pub_type

杂志文章

在线工具

Friedewald's equation for calculating LDL-cholesterol: Is it the time to say "Goodbye" and adopt direct LDL cholesterol methods?