Key result
Acute-phase Lp(a) levels during AMI are ~13 mg/dL lower than post-stabilization measurements.
Why the study?
Although Lp(a) is ideally measured outside acute inflammatory states, it is frequently assessed during ACS hospitalisation, and evidence remained limited on whether acute-phase measurement during AMI differs meaningfully from delayed testing after clinical stabilisation.
Does acute-phase measurement of lipoprotein(a) during hospitalisation differ from delayed testing after clinical stabilisation in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Observational (n=89)
No
Does acute-phase measurement of lipoprotein(a) during hospitalisation differ from delayed testing after clinical stabilisation in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
In patients with acute myocardial infarction, lipoprotein(a) levels are significantly lower during the acute hospitalisation phase compared to ≥6 weeks post-infarction, supporting delayed testing after clinical stabilisation for accurate cardiovascular risk stratification.
Acute Lp(a) underestimation during AMI warrants caution in acute testing; leaves open optimal timing for risk stratification pending prospective data.
Introduction Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically determined lipid particle associated with residual cardiovascular risk and its measurement is recommended at least once in adulthood. Although recent evidence suggests that Lp(a) should ideally be measured outside acute inflammatory states, it is still frequently assessed during hospitalisation for acute coronary syndromes. However, evidence remains limited regarding whether acute-phase measurement during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) differs meaningfully from delayed testing. Purpose To compare Lp(a) concentrations measured during the acute phase of MI with values obtained after clinical stabilisation, and to characterise the clinical profile of the studied cohort. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted at a tertiary centre, comparing Lp(a) levels obtained during hospitalisation with results from the first outpatient visit ≥6 weeks post-infarction. Paired samples were analysed using a paired t-test. Clinical, angiographic, and laboratory data were collected, including lipid profile, inflammatory markers, cardiac biomarkers and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Results A total of 89 patients were included (mean age 59 ± 13 years; 81% male). Most of them presented with STEMI (71%), Killip class I (67%) and single-vessel disease (49%); 97% underwent PCI and 82% achieved complete revascularisation. LVEF remained stable from hospitalisation to follow-up (46.4 ± 9.1% vs 46.1 ± 7.5%). LDL-C fell markedly (122 ± 47 to 53 ± 22 mg/dL), as did total cholesterol, triglycerides, hs-TnI, NT-proBNP and C-reactive protein, all with p<0.001 (as shown in Table 1). In contrast, Lp(a) rose significantly from the acute to stable phase (53.0 ± 44.7 to 66.2 ± 61.3 mg/dL; p = 0.002), without notable changes in haematological or renal parameters, suggesting biological stability despite the acute stress. Conclusion In patients with AMI, Lp(a) levels measured during the acute phase are significantly lower than those obtained after clinical stabilisation. These findings support measuring Lp(a) outside the acute phase to ensure accurate cardiovascular risk stratification. Nevertheless, given that Lp(a) is genetically determined and the observed variation is modest, post-acute measurements remain appropriate for long-term prognostic assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Monteiro et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction (n=89). Acute-phase lipoprotein(a) measurement during hospitalization vs. Post-stabilisation lipoprotein(a) measurement ≥6 weeks post-infarction was evaluated on Lipoprotein(a) concentration (mg/dL) (p=0.002). Acute-phase lipoprotein(a) measurement during AMI yielded significantly lower levels than delayed post-stabilisation testing ≥6 weeks later (53.0 vs 66.2 mg/dL; p=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: