Suppr超能文献

直接测量法与 Friedewald 计算法检测低密度脂蛋白胆固醇浓度的比较。

Comparison of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Concentrations by Direct Measurement and by Friedewald Calculation.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 2020 Mar 15;125(6):866-873. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.12.036. Epub 2019 Dec 26.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare Friedewald-calculated and directly measured low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. LDL-C is routinely estimated by the Friedewald formula in clinical practice. However, unreliability of the Friedewald-calculated LDL-C appears at lower LDL-C level or high triglyceride levels. We examined 147,143 Korean adults who underwent a comprehensive health examination in 2017. After excluding subjects with calculated Friedewald LDL-C <0 and triglyceride levels ≥400 mg/dL, 145,043 subjects (female; 43%, mean age; 42 ± 8) were analyzed. Friedewald-calculated LDL-C levels were approximately 15 mg/dL lower to directly measured LDL-C. Friedewald measurement had high sensitivity (79.2%, 82.2% of sensitivity in males and 74.5% of sensitivity in females) and specificity (100%) for directly measured LDL-C cut-off value of ≥100 mg/dL in all levels of triglyceride. In 82% of total subjects, LCL-C measured by both methods differed by more than 10 mg/dL. The proportion of reclassification between both methods for National Cholesterol Education Program categories of risk was 50.3% of patients with Friedewald measurement of LDL-C <70 mg/dL, 68% had directly measured LDL-C ≥70 mg/dL. Direct and Freidewald measurements of LDL-C levels are well correlated. However, concordance of both methods is low and reclassification between both is substantial for NECP categories of risk. Thus, it is desirable to make a global consensus on the LDL-C measurement.

摘要

本研究旨在比较弗里德瓦尔德(Friedewald)计算法和直接测量的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平。在临床实践中,LDL-C 通常通过弗里德瓦尔德公式估算。然而,在 LDL-C 水平较低或甘油三酯水平较高时,弗里德瓦尔德计算法的 LDL-C 结果可能不可靠。我们对 2017 年接受全面健康检查的 147143 名韩国成年人进行了检查。排除了计算弗里德瓦尔德 LDL-C <0 和甘油三酯水平≥400mg/dL 的受试者后,对 145043 名受试者(女性,43%,平均年龄 42±8 岁)进行了分析。直接测量的 LDL-C 比弗里德瓦尔德计算法的 LDL-C 低约 15mg/dL。在所有甘油三酯水平下,弗里德瓦尔德测量对直接测量 LDL-C 截断值≥100mg/dL 的检测均具有较高的敏感性(男性为 79.2%,女性为 74.5%)和特异性(100%)。在所有受试者中,82%的受试者两种方法测量的 LDL-C 差值超过 10mg/dL。两种方法之间的重新分类比例在 LDL-C<70mg/dL 的弗里德瓦尔德测量患者中为 50.3%,在直接测量 LDL-C≥70mg/dL 的患者中为 68%。直接和弗里德瓦尔德 LDL-C 水平的测量相关性良好。然而,两种方法的一致性较低,且对 NCEP 风险分类的重新分类显著。因此,有必要就 LDL-C 测量达成全球共识。

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验