4.7 Review

Are high density lipoprotein (HDL) and triglyceride levels relevant in stroke prevention?

Journal

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
Volume 52, Issue 2, Pages 199-207

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S0008-6363(01)00383-2

Keywords

cerebrovascular disorders; cholesterol; epidemiology; lipoproteins; statins

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although statins reduce the risk of non-haemorrhagic strokes and transient ischaemic attacks (TIA), little is known about the efficacy of fibrates. This situation has been partly remedied by the recent publication of two-fibrate based trials - The Veterans Affairs High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Intervention Trial (VAHIT) and the Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention Trial (BIP). In BIP, bezafibrate did not significantly reduce the risk of a cerebrovascular event (CVE). Bezafibrate increased the high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) level by 18% to 40 mg/dl (1.03 mmol/l) and decreased triglyceride (TG) levels by 21% to 115 mg/dl (1.29 mmol/l). In contrast, in VAHIT, gemfibrozil significantly reduced the risk of investigators designated stroke (P=0.04) and TIA (P<0.001). Gemfibrozil increased HDL by 6% to 33 mg/dl (0.85 mmol/l) and decreased TG by 31% to 110 mg/dl (1.25 mmol/l). However, the baseline low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) levels were higher in BIP than in VAHIT (148 versus 111 mg/dl; 3.82 versus 2.87 mmol/l). LDL levels were not markedly altered by treatment in either trial. Fibrates can improve several CVE predictors, like fibrinogen, lipoprotein (a), insulin sensitivity and platelet activity. Furthermore, lowered HDL and/or raised TG levels are associated with an increased risk of a CVE; fibrates are an appropriate treatment for this lipid profile. In conclusion, the evidence suggests that not only total cholesterol and LDL, but also HDL and TG levels predict the risk of a CVE. Statins, fibrates or a combination of these drugs can modify these variables. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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