Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
LipoproteinCholesterolin Plasma,Without
Useof the PreparativeUltracentrifuge
A method for estimating the cholesterol content constant and about 5:1 in normal subjects (1, 4)
of the serum low-density lipoprotein fraction (Sf- and in patients with all types of hyperlipoprotein-
0.20) is presented. The method involves measure- emia, except the rare Type III (1,2). The other is
ments of fasting plasma total cholesterol, tri- that when chylomicrons are not detectable, most
glyceride, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol of the triglyceride in plasma is contained in the
concentrations, none of which requires the use VLDL. Thus, in the vast majority of plasma samples
of the preparative ultracentrifuge. Corn parison in which chylomicrons are not present, the choleste-
of this suggested procedure with the more direct rol in plasma attributable to VLDL can be approxi-
procedure, in which the ultracentrifuge is used, mated by dividing the plasma triglyceride con-
yielded correlation coefficients of .94 to .99, de- centration by five. The justification of this method
pending on the patient population compared. for estimation of CLDL is the subject of this paper.
40 .98
hyperlipoproteinemia Type I through V according
to criteria previously described (1, 2). /
40 80 120 ISO 200 240 280
LDLE-CHOLESTEROL (m/I00 ml>
Resu Its
Fig. 1. Comparison of the plasma low-density lipoprotein
cholesterol concentration in normal individuals as calcu-
The results of lipid and ultracentrifuge lipopro-
lated by the estimation method (LELE) with that obtained
tein determinations in 232 men and 216 women- by the ultracentrifuge method (LDLU)
96 normal, 204 with Type II, and 148 with Type
IV-were analyzed. Various statistics derived
from these data are presented
CLDL was also calculated
in Table 1.
for each person accord-
::
760
TYPE
/
ing to the following formula:
720
C LDL = Cpa,ma - CHDL TG/5
in Figures 1
the
FE
!4e
1
./
6
8200
E
- >60 >60
-J -J
0
S
120 20
S
-.4/-.
-J
O 80
-844-
“.7. 0
80
-J
/
0
-7
-J -J
40
- 116+ / r85
40
#{149}
.94
I
40 80
I
120
#{149} I
160 200
I
240
#{149}
280
“
t#{149}
40
I
80
#{149}
120
I I
ISO
I
200 240
I
280
LDLE - CHOLESTEROL (m9 /lOOml) LOL6-CHOLESTEROL (mg/lOOmI)
Fig. 3. Comparison of the plasma low-density lipoprotein Fig. 4. Comparison of the plasma low.density lipoprotein
cholesterol concentration in Type IV patients as calcu- cholesterol concentration in Type IV patients as calcu-
lated by the estimation method (LIThE) with that obtained lated by the estimation method (LDLE) with that obtained
by the ultracentrifuge method (lJrmu); no exclusions by the ultracentrifuge method (LDLU), excluding individ-
uals with serum triglycerides 400 mg/100 ml
as Type IV. The frequency of this misclassification 3. Beaumont, J. L., Carlson, L. A., Cooper, G. R., Fejfar, Z.,
Fredrickson, D. S., and Strasser, T., Classification of hyperlipi-
will no doubt depend in part on the cut-off limits daemias and hyperlypoproteinemias. Bull. WHO 43, 891 (1970).
used in defining an abnormal LDL concentration. 4. Hatch, F. T., and Lees, R. S., Practical methods for plasma
It is noteworthy that despite the good agreement lipoprotein analysis. Advan. Lipid Res. 6, 1 (1968).
between the estimation and actual measurement of 5. Total cholesterol procedure N-24b. Auto-Analyzer Manual,
CLDL, simple division of the plasma triglyceride Technicon Instruments Corp., Tarrytown, N. Y., 1964.
by five does not give a very accurate estimate of 6. Kessler, G., and Lederer, H., Fluorometric measurement of
triglycerides. In Automation in Analytical Chemistry, Technicon
the VLDL cholesterol alone, even in normals or Symposic 1965, L. T. Skeggs, Jr., et al., Eds. Mediad, New York,
patients with Type II or Type IV. In normals and 1966, p 341.
patients with Type II the average VLDL cholesterol 7. Fredrickson, D. S., Levy, R. I., and Lindgren, F. T., A com-
concentration is low (see Table 1), and thus even parison of heritable abnormal lipoprotein patterns as defined by
two different techniques. J. Clin. Invest. 47, 2446 (1968).
small absolute errors yield large percentage errors.
8. Draper, N. R., and Smith, H., Applied Regression Analysis,
In Type IV the average VLDL cholesterol concen- John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1966, p 33.
tration is higher, but large percentage errors still 9. Dixon, W. J., and Massey, F. J., Jr., Introduction to Statistical
result. However, when the estimate of CVLDL is Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, N. Y., 1957, p 127.
used to calculate CLDL the percentage error does 10. Dixon, W. J., and Massey, F. J., Jr., Introduction to Sta-
decrease to an acceptable level because the ab- tistical Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, N. Y., 1957, p 130.
solute error in CVLDL estimation is small relative 11. Draper, N. R., and Smith, H., Applied Regression Analysis,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1966, p 7.
to the concentration of CLDL.
12. Quarfordt, S., Levy, R. I., and Fredrickson, D. S., On the
Of some concern is the number of Type IV lipoprotein abnormality in Type III hyperlipoproteinemia. J.
patients with relatively large values for ILDLU- Clin. Invest. 50, 754 (1971).