Accuracy of non-fasting lipid profile for the assessment of lipoprotein coronary risk
JCPSP-Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan. 2016; 26 (12): 954-957
de En
| IMEMR
| ID: emr-183358
Bibliothèque responsable:
EMRO
Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of non-fasting lipid profile in the diagnosis of hyperlipidemia, taking fasting lipid profile as gold standard, in adult population
Study Design: Cross-sectional validation study
Place and Duration of Study: Department of Chemical Pathology and Endocrinology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Rawalpindi, from July to December 2014
Methodology: One hundred seventy-five adult patients coming for fasting lipid profile were included; their non-fasting samples were taken on the next day. Patients on anti-cholesterol treatment and indoor patients were excluded. Total cholesterol [TC], high density lipoprotein-cholestrol [HDL-C], and triglycerides were measured by direct enzymatic colorimetric method by Modular p-800[registered]. Low density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-C] was calculated by Friedewald's formula, but when triglyceride was greater than 4.5 mmol/l, then LDL-C was measured directly by homogenous enzymatic colorimetric method. Non-HDL-C was calculated by simple equation, i.e. TC-HDL-C
Results: Non-fasting lipid profile had 93% specificity, 51% sensitivity, 94% positive predictive value and 49% negative predictive value; and 65% accuracy with 7.28 positive likelihood ratio and 0.52 negative likelihood ratio. Non-fasting TC and non-HDL-C were significantly higher than fasting TC and non-HDL-C by mean difference of 0.2 mmol/l each with p=0.001 and p=0.004, respectively. Fasting and non fasting HDL-C are comparable to each other with mean difference of 0.01 mmol/l [p=0.745]. Receiver operating curve [ROC] of non-fasting non-HDL-C showed 0.804 [95%CI [0.738-0.870], [p=0.000] area under the curve [AUC] indicating that it was a significant test for ruling out hyperlipidemia. Bland-Altmann plot showed a significant difference between non-fasting, non-HDL-C and fasting LDL-C and non-fasting, non-HDL-C -0.087540 with bias -0.00109; therefore, these cannot be alternative to each other
Conclusion: Diagnostic accuracy of non-fasting lipid profile was found significantly higher than fasting lipid profile [p=0.004] for the assessment of lipoprotein coronary risk on the basis of non-HDL-C, which seemed to be significant test for ruling out hyperlipidemia
Study Design: Cross-sectional validation study
Place and Duration of Study: Department of Chemical Pathology and Endocrinology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Rawalpindi, from July to December 2014
Methodology: One hundred seventy-five adult patients coming for fasting lipid profile were included; their non-fasting samples were taken on the next day. Patients on anti-cholesterol treatment and indoor patients were excluded. Total cholesterol [TC], high density lipoprotein-cholestrol [HDL-C], and triglycerides were measured by direct enzymatic colorimetric method by Modular p-800[registered]. Low density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-C] was calculated by Friedewald's formula, but when triglyceride was greater than 4.5 mmol/l, then LDL-C was measured directly by homogenous enzymatic colorimetric method. Non-HDL-C was calculated by simple equation, i.e. TC-HDL-C
Results: Non-fasting lipid profile had 93% specificity, 51% sensitivity, 94% positive predictive value and 49% negative predictive value; and 65% accuracy with 7.28 positive likelihood ratio and 0.52 negative likelihood ratio. Non-fasting TC and non-HDL-C were significantly higher than fasting TC and non-HDL-C by mean difference of 0.2 mmol/l each with p=0.001 and p=0.004, respectively. Fasting and non fasting HDL-C are comparable to each other with mean difference of 0.01 mmol/l [p=0.745]. Receiver operating curve [ROC] of non-fasting non-HDL-C showed 0.804 [95%CI [0.738-0.870], [p=0.000] area under the curve [AUC] indicating that it was a significant test for ruling out hyperlipidemia. Bland-Altmann plot showed a significant difference between non-fasting, non-HDL-C and fasting LDL-C and non-fasting, non-HDL-C -0.087540 with bias -0.00109; therefore, these cannot be alternative to each other
Conclusion: Diagnostic accuracy of non-fasting lipid profile was found significantly higher than fasting lipid profile [p=0.004] for the assessment of lipoprotein coronary risk on the basis of non-HDL-C, which seemed to be significant test for ruling out hyperlipidemia
Recherche sur Google
Indice:
IMEMR
Type d'étude:
Etiology_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
langue:
En
Texte intégral:
J. Coll. Physicians Surg. Pak.
Année:
2016