4.8 Article

Small Dense Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Predicts Cardiovascular Events in Liver Transplant Recipients

Journal

HEPATOLOGY
Volume 70, Issue 1, Pages 98-107

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hep.30518

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCATS NIH HHS [UL1 TR002649] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality after liver transplantation (LT). Although LT is associated with dyslipidemia, particularly atherogenic lipoprotein subparticles, the impact of these subparticles on CVD-related events is unknown. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the impact of small dense (sdLDL-C) low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (LDL-C) on CVD events. Prospectively enrolled patients (N = 130) had detailed lipid profile consisting of traditional lipid parameters and sdLDL-C and were followed for CVD events. The primary endpoint was a CVD composite consisting of myocardial infarction (MI), angina, need for coronary revascularization, and cardiac death. Mean age of the cohort was 58 +/- 11 years, and the most common etiology of liver disease (LD) was hepatitis C virus (N = 48) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (N = 23). A total of 20 CVD events were noted after median follow-up of 45 months. The baseline traditional profile was similar in patients with and without CVD events. A serum LDL-C cutoff of 100 mg/dL was unable to identify individuals at risk of a CVD event (P = 0.86). In contrast, serum concentration of atherogenic sdLDL-C >25 mg/dL was predictive of CVD events with a hazard ratio of 6.376 (95% confidence interval, 2.65, 15.34; P < 0.001). This relationship was independent of diabetes, hypertension, sex, ethnicity, LD, obesity, and statin use. Conclusion: sdLDL-C independently predicted CVD events whereas LDL-C did not. Thus, sdLDL-C may provide a useful clinical tool in risk stratifying and managing patients after LT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available