Friedewald公式和改良Friedewald公式与直接匀相法测定低密度脂蛋白胆固醇的比较。

Comparison of friedewald formula and modified friedewald formula with direct homogeneous assay for low density lipoprotein cholesterol estimation.

作者信息

Anwar Muhammad, Khan Dilshad Ahmed, Khan Farooq Ahmad

机构信息

Department of Chemical Pathology and Endocrinology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP), Rawalpindi.

出版信息

J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2014 Jan;24(1):8-12.

DOI:
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the Friedewald and modified Friedewald formulae with direct homogeneous assay for serum lowdensity lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels estimation.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY

Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Rawalpindi, from June to December 2011.

METHODOLOGY

Healthy subjects of either gender, from Rawalpindi, aged 18-75 years were included by consecutive sampling. Patients with diabetes mellitus, chronic liver disease, chronic kidney disease, those taking lipid lowering drugs and samples with triglyceride (TG) > 4.52 mmol/l were excluded from the study. Total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, TG and LDL-C were measured on Hitachi 912 chemistry analyzer (Roche). LDL-C levels were also calculated by Friedewald formula (FF) and Vujovic modified formula (VMF). Paired sample t-test and scatter plots were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Although both calculated methods showed good correlation with direct assay (r > 0.93) in 300 subjects, but the difference was statistically significant. The ffLDL-C were 0.12 ± 31 mmol/l (p < 0.001) lower and vmfLDL-C were 0.11 ± 26 mmol/l (p < 0.001) higher than dLDL-C. The difference was not significant between ffLDL-C and dLDL-C at TG levels < 1.70 mmol/l (p = 0.58) and between vmfLDL-C and dLDL-C at TG levels 2.26 - 4.52 mmol/l (p = 0.38). At all other TG levels, the difference between LDL-C calculated by both formulas and dLDL-C was statistically significant (p < 0.001). As compared to direct assay, 11% and 14% subjects were classified in wrong National Cholesterol Education Programm's cardiac risk categories by FF and VMF respectively.

CONCLUSION

LDL-C should be measured by direct homogeneous assay in routine clinical laboratories, as the calculated methods did not have a uniform performance for LDL-C estimation at different TG levels.

摘要

目的

比较Friedewald公式和改良Friedewald公式与直接匀相测定法估算血清低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平的差异。

研究设计

横断面研究。

研究地点和时间

2011年6月至12月,拉瓦尔品第武装部队病理研究所。

方法

通过连续抽样纳入来自拉瓦尔品第、年龄在18 - 75岁的健康受试者,男女不限。排除患有糖尿病、慢性肝病、慢性肾病的患者,正在服用降脂药物的患者以及甘油三酯(TG)> 4.52 mmol/l的样本。在日立912化学分析仪(罗氏)上测定总胆固醇、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇、TG和LDL-C。LDL-C水平也通过Friedewald公式(FF)和武约维奇改良公式(VMF)计算。采用配对样本t检验和散点图进行统计分析。

结果

在300名受试者中,尽管两种计算方法与直接测定法均显示出良好的相关性(r > 0.93),但差异具有统计学意义。与直接测定的LDL-C(dLDL-C)相比,FF计算的LDL-C(ffLDL-C)低0.12 ± 31 mmol/l(p < 0.001),VMF计算的LDL-C(vmfLDL-C)高0.11 ± 26 mmol/l(p < 0.001)。在TG水平< 1.70 mmol/l时,ffLDL-C与dLDL-C之间的差异不显著(p = 0.58);在TG水平为2.26 - 4.52 mmol/l时,vmfLDL-C与dLDL-C之间的差异不显著(p = 0.38)。在所有其他TG水平下,两种公式计算的LDL-C与dLDL-C之间的差异均具有统计学意义(p < 0.001)。与直接测定法相比,分别有11%和14%的受试者通过FF和VMF被错误分类到美国国家胆固醇教育计划的心脏风险类别中。

结论

在常规临床实验室中,应采用直接匀相测定法测量LDL-C,因为计算方法在不同TG水平下对LDL-C的估算表现并不一致。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索