Correlation Analysis of Direct LDL Measurement and Calculated LDL Methods in Lipid Profile Assessment: A Comprehensive Study.

INTRODUCTION

Assessing LDL cholesterol is pivotal for cardiovascular risk evaluation. While direct LDL measurement is accurate, calculated LDL methods offer practicality and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to evaluate the correlation between direct LDL measurement and various calculated LDL methods, shedding light on their clinical utility.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of lipid profiles from 1075 patients was conducted, encompassing direct LDL measurement and calculation of LDL using nine different methods. Statistical analyses, including correlation coefficients and scatter plots, were employed to assess the agreement between direct LDL and calculated LDL methods.

RESULTS

Surprisingly, all calculated LDL methods exhibited a robust correlation with direct LDL measurement across the study cohort. The Friedewald equation, as well as modified equations demonstrated particularly robust correlations. These findings indicate the reliability of calculated LDL methods in estimating LDL cholesterol levels.

DISCUSSION

The significant correlation observed between direct LDL measurement and calculated LDL methods underscores the clinical utility of the latter. While direct LDL measurement remains the gold standard, calculated LDL methods offer practical advantages, particularly in resource-limited settings.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study highlights the excellent correlation between direct LDL measurement and calculated LDL methods in lipid profile assessment. Clinicians can leverage calculated LDL methods as reliable alternatives for LDL cholesterol estimation, facilitating efficient cardiovascular risk evaluation in routine clinical practice. Further research may explore the optimal use of calculated LDL methods in specific patient populations, enhancing their clinical applicability and utility.