Comparison of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level calculated using the modified Martin/Hopkins estimation or the Friedewald formula with direct homogeneous assay measured low-density lipoprotein cholesterol

I. Reiber, L. Márk, G. Paragh, P. Toth
{"title":"Comparison of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level calculated using the modified Martin/Hopkins estimation or the Friedewald formula with direct homogeneous assay measured low-density lipoprotein cholesterol","authors":"I. Reiber, L. Márk, G. Paragh, P. Toth","doi":"10.5114/aoms.2020.97847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) represents the primary lipoprotein target for reducing cardiovascular risk (CV). The aim of our study is to compare the direct and the calculated LDL-C levels in the range below 1.8 mmol/l and 2.6 mmol/l depending on triglycerides, and to evaluate the variation in remnant lipoprotein cholesterol. Material and methods We investigated 14 906 lipid profiles from fasting blood samples of Hungarian individuals with triglycerides < 4.5 mmol/l. Total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG) and direct LDL-C were measured by the enzymatic assay. We calculated LDL-C by Friedewald’s formula (F-LDL-C) and by using the new Martin/Hopkins estimation (MH-LDL-C). Results For F-LDL-C below 1.8 mmol/l, MH-LDL-C was 58% between 1.8 and 2.59 mmol/l when TG was in the range 2.3–4.5 mmol/l. For F-LDL-C below 2.6 mmol/l, the MH-LDL-C concordance was 73% in the same TG range (2.3–4.5 mmol/l. If MH-LDL-C was less than 1.8 mmol/l or between 1.8 and 2.59 mmol/l, the difference between non-HDL-C (TC – HDL-C = AC: atherogenic cholesterol) and (MH)LDL-C was less than 0.8 mmol/l in the TG range below 2.3 mmol/l. The remnant lipoprotein cholesterol values were on average 0.5 mmol/l lower by the Martin/Hopkins estimation compared to the Friedewald’s calculation if the TG was above 2.3 mmol/l. Conclusions The Friedewald equation tends to underestimate LDL-C levels in very high and high-risk settings. Our analysis supports the conclusion that in Hungarian patients, LDL-C estimation using the Martin/Hopkins formula, which is validated by the beta-quantification method, yields a more accurate LDL-C value than that calculated by the Friedewald formula.","PeriodicalId":190584,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Medical Science : AMS","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Medical Science : AMS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2020.97847","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Introduction Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) represents the primary lipoprotein target for reducing cardiovascular risk (CV). The aim of our study is to compare the direct and the calculated LDL-C levels in the range below 1.8 mmol/l and 2.6 mmol/l depending on triglycerides, and to evaluate the variation in remnant lipoprotein cholesterol. Material and methods We investigated 14 906 lipid profiles from fasting blood samples of Hungarian individuals with triglycerides < 4.5 mmol/l. Total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG) and direct LDL-C were measured by the enzymatic assay. We calculated LDL-C by Friedewald’s formula (F-LDL-C) and by using the new Martin/Hopkins estimation (MH-LDL-C). Results For F-LDL-C below 1.8 mmol/l, MH-LDL-C was 58% between 1.8 and 2.59 mmol/l when TG was in the range 2.3–4.5 mmol/l. For F-LDL-C below 2.6 mmol/l, the MH-LDL-C concordance was 73% in the same TG range (2.3–4.5 mmol/l. If MH-LDL-C was less than 1.8 mmol/l or between 1.8 and 2.59 mmol/l, the difference between non-HDL-C (TC – HDL-C = AC: atherogenic cholesterol) and (MH)LDL-C was less than 0.8 mmol/l in the TG range below 2.3 mmol/l. The remnant lipoprotein cholesterol values were on average 0.5 mmol/l lower by the Martin/Hopkins estimation compared to the Friedewald’s calculation if the TG was above 2.3 mmol/l. Conclusions The Friedewald equation tends to underestimate LDL-C levels in very high and high-risk settings. Our analysis supports the conclusion that in Hungarian patients, LDL-C estimation using the Martin/Hopkins formula, which is validated by the beta-quantification method, yields a more accurate LDL-C value than that calculated by the Friedewald formula.
使用改良的Martin/Hopkins估计或Friedewald公式计算的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平与直接均相测定法测量的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平的比较
低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)是降低心血管风险(CV)的主要靶蛋白。我们的研究目的是比较直接和计算LDL-C水平在低于1.8 mmol/l和2.6 mmol/l的范围内取决于甘油三酯,并评估残余脂蛋白胆固醇的变化。材料和方法我们从甘油三酯< 4.5 mmol/l的匈牙利人的空腹血液样本中调查了14906个血脂谱。酶促法测定总胆固醇(TC)、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)、甘油三酯(TG)和直接LDL-C。我们通过Friedewald公式(F-LDL-C)和新的Martin/Hopkins估计(MH-LDL-C)计算LDL-C。结果F-LDL-C在1.8 mmol/l以下时,TG在2.3 ~ 4.5 mmol/l范围内,MH-LDL-C在1.8 ~ 2.59 mmol/l范围内的比值为58%;在相同TG范围内(2.3-4.5 mmol/l), F-LDL-C低于2.6 mmol/l时,MH-LDL-C一致性为73%。如果MH-LDL-C小于1.8 mmol/l或在1.8 ~ 2.59 mmol/l之间,则在TG低于2.3 mmol/l范围内,非HDL-C (TC -HDL-C = AC:致动脉粥样硬化胆固醇)与(MH)LDL-C的差异小于0.8 mmol/l。如果TG高于2.3 mmol/l,根据Martin/Hopkins的估计,残余脂蛋白胆固醇值比Friedewald的计算平均低0.5 mmol/l。结论:Friedewald方程倾向于低估LDL-C在非常高和高风险环境中的水平。我们的分析支持这样的结论:在匈牙利患者中,使用Martin/Hopkins公式估算LDL-C,并通过β -量化方法验证,产生的LDL-C值比使用Friedewald公式计算的值更准确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信