Key result
Friedewald formula miscalculates LDL-C by ~50% in 14% of minimal-change liver disease patients.
Cross-Sectional (n=47)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The accuracy of the Friedewald formula in estimating low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol was investigated in 47 alcoholic patients with liver disease (21 minimal-change, 26 cirrhotic) by comparing the results with those obtained by sequential preparative ultracentrifugation. In 14% of subjects with minimal-change disease, the error in the estimated LDL cholesterol was 50% +/- 9% (mean +/- SD; range 40-59%) and was related to the degree of attendant hypertriglyceridemia (r = 0.98; P < 0.001). A similar degree of error was observed in patients with cirrhosis, despite the absence of hypertriglyceridemia; an abnormal VLDL cholesterol: triglyceride ratio was the contributory factor in the discrepancy. We conclude that, as is the case in other clinical pathologies in which abnormalities of lipoprotein composition have been described (e.g., diabetes), the Friedewald formula to estimate LDL cholesterol may be inappropriate in chronic alcoholics, particularly those in whom a degree of hepatic dysfunction may be suspected.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Matas et al. (1994) conducted a cross-sectional in Alcoholic patients with liver disease (n=47). Friedewald formula for estimating LDL cholesterol vs. Sequential preparative ultracentrifugation was evaluated on Error in estimated LDL cholesterol (p=<0.001). The Friedewald formula for estimating LDL cholesterol produced an error of 50% ± 9% in 14% of minimal-change liver disease patients, strongly correlating with hypertriglyceridemia (r=0.98; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: