Why the study?
Does the level of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol predict the severity of arteriographically documented coronary artery disease in men?
Does the level of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol predict the severity of arteriographically documented coronary artery disease in men?
Low HDL cholesterol is inversely related to the severity of coronary artery disease, even in patients with desirable total and LDL cholesterol levels.
Low HDL associated with greater CAD severity despite low total cholesterol; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective confirmation before clinical use.
Recommendations for identifying persons at high risk for coronary heart disease are based primarily on levels of total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. We examined whether, given knowledge of these levels, information on the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level would improve the prediction of arteriographically documented coronary artery disease among 591 men. We found that even at levels of total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol considered desirable, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was inversely related to disease severity. For example, among the 112 men with a total cholesterol level <180 mg per dl, the mean occlusion score (representing the overall severity of disease) was 107 among men with a high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level < or = 30 mg per dl vs a mean score of 52 among men with levels > or = 45 mg per dl. Furthermore, men with low levels of both low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (< 110 mg per dl) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (< or = 30 mg per dl) had as much occlusive disease as did men with high levels of both lipoprotein fractions. Given information on the ratio of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to total cholesterol, the actual levels of the lipoprotein fractions did not improve disease prediction. Our results emphasize the importance of considering high-density lipoprotein cholesterol when assessing coronary heart disease risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Freedman et al. (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: