4.7 Article

Comparison of remnant cholesterol levels estimated by calculated and measured LDL-C levels in Chinese patients with coronary heart disease

Journal

CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA
Volume 500, Issue -, Pages 75-80

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2019.09.020

Keywords

Non-fasting; Estimated remnant cholesterol; Coronary heart disease; Chinese

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81270956, 81470577]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Evidence about whether remnant cholesterol (RC), especially non-fasting RC, is a causal risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD) in Chinese subjects is rare. Recently, estimated RC level (RCe) was applied in many studies with large population. We aimed to compare fasting and non-fasting RCe calculated by LDL-C level determined by different methods in Chinese subjects, and investigate their contributions to CHD. Methods: Levels of TC, TG and HDL-C were measured directly in 273 CHD patients (CHD group) and 136 controls (CON group) before and at 4 h after a daily breakfast. LDL-C level was measured directly or calculated by Friedewald equation at TG < 4.5 mmol/L. RC level estimated by calculated or measured LDL-C was termed as RCe1 or RCe2. Contributions of different RC levels to CHD were evaluated by multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: Both RCe1 and RCe2 increased significantly at 4h after breakfast (both p < 0.05). RCe1 was significantly higher than RCe2 in fasting or non-fasting state (p < 0.05). RCe1 was closely related to RCe2, especially in the highest quartile of RCe1 (p < 0.05). Non-fasting RCe1 or RCe2 and fasting RCe2 independently predicted CHD after adjustment for traditional risk factors (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Although RCe1 was significantly higher than RCe2, non-fasting RCe, no matter RCe1 or RCe2, after a daily breakfast was an independent predictor for CHD risk in Chinese subjects, indicating that the non-fasting state is critical in the development of atherosclerosis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available