Cross-sectional study found high dyslipidaemia prevalence in untreated hypertensive patients, suggesting key predictors including male gender and obesity.
Background: Cardiovascular diseases constitute the leading global health burden, driven by interrelated risk factors such as hypertension and dyslipidaemia. Despite their synergistic role in atherosclerosis, data regarding dyslipidaemia patterns in untreated hypertensive populations in Nigeria remain limited. Objective: This study aimed to determine the prevalence, phenotypic patterns and predictors of dyslipidaemia amongst untreated hypertensive patients at the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital (UMTH). Materials and Methods: This hospital-based and cross-sectional study examined 200 treatment-naïve hypertensive adults alongside 196 age- and sex-matched normotensive controls at the UMTH, conducted from June 2019 to June 2021. Various anthropometric, clinical and biochemical parameters, including lipid profiles, were evaluated. Dyslipidaemia was delineated according to the established criteria. Results: The prevalence of dyslipidaemia was significantly higher in hypertensive patients (66.5%). Untreated, newly diagnosed hypertensive patients demonstrated elevated total cholesterol (25.5% vs. 2.6%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (25.5% vs. 16.3%), triglycerides (28.5% vs. 12.2%) and reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) (42.5% vs. 22.1%). Isolated low HDL-C (44.5%) was the most common abnormality. Obese individuals exhibited higher systolic and diastolic blood pressure along with atherogenic lipid profiles. Male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 2.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.26–5.83), obesity (OR = 2.50; 95% CI: 1.55–4.03) and advancing age (OR = 1.05/year; 95% CI: 1.01–1.08) are found to be independent predictors of dyslipidaemia. Conclusion: Two-thirds of untreated hypertensive patients in this Nigerian cohort had dyslipidaemia, predominantly low HDL-C. Obesity, male gender and age were the significant predictors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Galtimari et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: