Background/Aim: This study was performed to comparatively evaluate the results obtained for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentrations by either a newly described direct method or the Friedewald equation in subjects with and without chronic renal disease. Methods: Fasting plasma was obtained from a total of 169 subjects, 105 with normal renal function (including 53 hyperlipidaemic) and 64 with chronic renal disease (nephrotic syndrome and/or chronic renal failure; including 40 hyperlipidaemic patients), and analyzed for LDL cholesterol using the Friedewald equation and a direct LDL assay method. Results: The Friedewald equation and the direct LDL cholesterol assay correlated well with each other (r = 0.79–0.90 in all subjects with plasma triglyceride, TG, levels greater than or less than 4.0 mmol/l and with and without chronic renal disease and/or hyperlipidaemia, all p < 0.0001). The values for LDL cholesterol, however, tended to be higher with the direct measurement. This mean difference was trivial in hyperlipidaemic subjects with (8.5%) and without (7.1%) normal renal function (both p < 0.05), but could be clinically significant in those with TG >4.0 mmol/l (mean difference 18%, p < 0.001). Indeed, bias plots confirmed this observation of wider negative bias for Friedewald estimation in these moderately hypertriglyceridaemic subjects. Conclusion: For most routine laboratories the options immediately available for assessment of lipid levels are the Friedewald equation or the direct measurement. The Friedewald equation and the direct assay method for LDL cholesterol are about equally good for assessment of the LDL status in patients with chronic renal disease and plasma TG <4.0 mmol/l. Where there are restraints on laboratory budgets, it would appear appropriate that the more expensive direct assay method be restricted to cases in whom plasma TG >4.0 mmol/l or to patients who, for whatever reason, are unable to produce fasting samples.

1.
Appel GB, Valeri A, Appel AS, Blum C: The hyperlipidaemia of the nephrotic syndrome. Am J Med 1989;87:S45N–S50N.
2.
Green D, Stone NJ, Krumlovsky FA: Putative atherogenic factors in patients with chronic renal failure. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1983;26:133–144.
3.
Tsukamoto Y, Kokubo T, Hori A, Moriya R, Kobayashi Y: Lipoprotein derangement during steroid treatment in minimal-change nephrotic syndrome. Nephron 1996;73:606–612.
4.
Keane WF, Kasiske DL, O’Donnel MP: Lipids and progressive glomerulosclerosis: A model analogous to atherosclerosis. Am J Nephrol 1986;8:261–267.
5.
Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults: Summary of the Second Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel II). JAMA 1993;269:3015–3023.
6.
Hunninghake DB: Diagnosis and treatment of lipid disorders. Med Clin North Am 1994;78:247–257.
7.
Friedewald WT, Levy RI, Fredrickson DS: Estimation of the concentration of low density lipoprotein cholesterol in plasma without use of the preparative centrifuge. Clin Chem 1972;18:499–502.
8.
Orchard TJ: Dyslipoproteinaemia and diabetes. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 1990;19:361–379.
9.
Reaven GM: Abnormal lipoprotein metabolism in non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Am J Med 1987;83:31–40.
10.
Rubies-Prat J, Reverter JL, Senti M, Pedro-Botet J, Salinas I, Lucas A, Nogues X, Sanmarti A: Calculated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol should not be used for management of lipoprotein abnormalities in patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 1993;16:1081–1086.
11.
Jialal I, Hirany SH, Deveraj S, Sherwood TA: Comparison of an immunoprecipitation method for direct measurement of LDL cholesterol with beta-quantification (ultracentrifugation). Am J Clin Pathol 1995;104:76–81.
12.
McNamara JR, Cole TG, Contois JH, Ferguson CA, Ordovas JM, Schaefer EJ: Immunoseparation method for measuring low-density lipoprotein cholesterol directly from serum. Clin Chem 1995;41:232–240.
13.
Hirany S, Li D, Jialal I: A more valid measurement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in diabetic patients. Am J Med 1997;102:48–53.
14.
Attman PO, Alaupovic P: Lipid and apolipoprotein profiles of uraemic dyslipoproteinaemia: Relation to renal function and dialysis. Nephron 1991;57:401–410.
15.
SPSS-X: User’s guide, ed 2. New York, McGraw Hill, 1986.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.