The low-density lipoprotein debate: indirect methods vs direct measurement in the Nepalese population.

Ranjan Suwal, Vivek Pant, Sushil Ram Shrestha, Prakash Poudel, Sujan Shrestha, Santosh Pradhan, Shital Bhandary
{"title":"The low-density lipoprotein debate: indirect methods vs direct measurement in the Nepalese population.","authors":"Ranjan Suwal, Vivek Pant, Sushil Ram Shrestha, Prakash Poudel, Sujan Shrestha, Santosh Pradhan, Shital Bhandary","doi":"10.1093/labmed/lmaf016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Many clinical laboratories use indirect estimation methods for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) because of cost and practicality. This study compared the accuracy of indirect LDL-C estimates derived from the Friedewald, Puavilai, Hatta, and Martin equations in a Nepalese population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective analysis included 7750 patients who underwent lipid profile testing at the Norvic International Hospital, Kathmandu, from February 1 to July 31, 2021. Participants were categorized based on triglyceride levels (<400 mg/dL and ≥400 mg/dL). Pearson correlation, paired t tests, and analysis of variance were employed to assess relationships and differences between directly measured and estimated LDL-C values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Puavilai equation demonstrated the highest concordance with directly measured LDL-C (92%), followed by the Martin (89%), Friedewald (88%), and Hatta (81%) equations. The Puavilai equation exhibited the smallest discrepancies (mean difference = 8.9 mg/dL) for triglyceride values below 150 mg/dL. The Martin equation was most accurate for triglyceride values above 150 mg/dL (mean difference = 10.0 mg/dL) and remained reliable, even for triglyceride values above 400 mg/dL. The Hatta equation showed the largest estimation errors.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The Puavilai equation is recommended for estimating LDL-C when triglyceride levels are below 150 mg/dL, while the Martin equation is preferred for levels above this threshold in the Nepalese population.</p>","PeriodicalId":94124,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmaf016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Many clinical laboratories use indirect estimation methods for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) because of cost and practicality. This study compared the accuracy of indirect LDL-C estimates derived from the Friedewald, Puavilai, Hatta, and Martin equations in a Nepalese population.

Methods: This retrospective analysis included 7750 patients who underwent lipid profile testing at the Norvic International Hospital, Kathmandu, from February 1 to July 31, 2021. Participants were categorized based on triglyceride levels (<400 mg/dL and ≥400 mg/dL). Pearson correlation, paired t tests, and analysis of variance were employed to assess relationships and differences between directly measured and estimated LDL-C values.

Results: The Puavilai equation demonstrated the highest concordance with directly measured LDL-C (92%), followed by the Martin (89%), Friedewald (88%), and Hatta (81%) equations. The Puavilai equation exhibited the smallest discrepancies (mean difference = 8.9 mg/dL) for triglyceride values below 150 mg/dL. The Martin equation was most accurate for triglyceride values above 150 mg/dL (mean difference = 10.0 mg/dL) and remained reliable, even for triglyceride values above 400 mg/dL. The Hatta equation showed the largest estimation errors.

Discussion: The Puavilai equation is recommended for estimating LDL-C when triglyceride levels are below 150 mg/dL, while the Martin equation is preferred for levels above this threshold in the Nepalese population.

低密度脂蛋白之争:尼泊尔人口中间接方法与直接测量
由于成本和实用性的原因,许多临床实验室采用间接估算法测定低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)。本研究比较了尼泊尔人群中由Friedewald、Puavilai、Hatta和Martin方程得出的间接LDL-C估计值的准确性。方法:这项回顾性分析包括7750名患者,这些患者于2021年2月1日至7月31日在加德满都的Norvic国际医院接受了血脂检测。参与者根据甘油三酯水平进行分类(结果:Puavilai方程与直接测量的LDL-C的一致性最高(92%),其次是Martin (89%), Friedewald(88%)和Hatta(81%)方程。当甘油三酯值低于150 mg/dL时,Puavilai方程显示出最小的差异(平均差异= 8.9 mg/dL)。马丁方程对甘油三酯值高于150毫克/分升(平均差值为10.0毫克/分升)最准确,即使甘油三酯值高于400毫克/分升也保持可靠。Hatta方程的估计误差最大。讨论:当甘油三酯水平低于150 mg/dL时,推荐使用Puavilai方程来估计LDL-C,而在尼泊尔人群中,Martin方程更适用于高于这个阈值的水平。
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