Chronotropic Response and Cognitive Function in a Cohort at Risk for Alzheimer's Disease.

The objective of this study was to examine the association of chronotropic response (CR) and heart rate (HR) recovery- two indices of cardiovascular function within the context of a graded exercise test- with cognitive performance in a cognitively healthy, late-middle-aged cohort at risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Ninety participants (age = 63.52±5.86 years; 65.6% female) from the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention participated in this study. They underwent graded exercise testing and a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment that assessed the following four cognitive domains: Immediate Memory, Verbal & Learning Memory, Working Memory, and Speed & Flexibility. Regression analyses, adjusted for age, sex, and education, were used to examine the association between CR, HR recovery, and cognition. We found significant associations between CR and cognitive performance in the domains of Immediate Memory, Verbal Learning & Memory, and Speed & Flexibility. In contrast, HR recovery was not significantly associated with cognitive function. The association between CR and cognition persisted even after controlling for HR recovery. Together, these findings indicatethat, in a cognitively normal, late-middle-aged cohort, CR is a stronger correlate of cognitive performance than HR recovery. Overall, this study reinforces the idea that cardiovascular health plays an important role in cognitive function, specifically in a cohort at risk for AD; and that interventions that promote vascular health may be a viable pathway to preventing or slowing cognitive decline due to AD.

Inaccuracy of lipid measurements with the portable Cholestech L.D.X analyzer in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND: Although total cholesterol concentrations measured by portable lipid analyzers have acceptable bias and precision in young and middle-aged adults, clinically relevant differences in HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride values have been described. Furthermore, the accuracy of portable lipid analyzers in older hyperlipidemic individuals, who have a high incidence of coronary heart disease, has not been validated. This study determined the biases and variability in portable lipid measurements in older patients with hypercholesterolemia and related them to National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. METHODS: Participants were > or =70 years of age with fasting serum LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations > 1.40 g/L. Fasting fingerstick samples were analyzed on a Cholestech L.D.X desktop analyzer. Antecubital venous samples were analyzed in a proficiency-certified clinical laboratory. RESULTS: Portable measurements systematically overestimated triglycerides (0.296 g/L; P <0.001) and HDL-C (0.015 g/L; P = 0.026). LDL-C concentrations were underestimated (0.043 g/L; P = 0.046). Total and non-HDL cholesterol calculations based on the portable lipid device provided unbiased estimates, but wide variability was present. Significant variability in lipid determinations limited their clinical usefulness in individual patients, especially because 2 SD of the mean bias between the laboratory and the portable determinations of LDL-C and non-HDL cholesterol exceeded the 0.30 g/L cutoff that defines treatment targets in the current lipid guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Lipid values obtained from portable lipid analyzers may be useful for screening, but they should not be used to make clinical decisions regarding the diagnosis and management of dyslipidemia in individual patients.